Mr. Dinesh K. Suvarna Proprietor of Maruti Motors (Now Closed) Vs. Shri Avinash M. Gadre - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/1110904
CourtMaharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Mumbai
Decided OnNov-16-2009
Case NumberFirst Appeal No.766 of 2009 @ Misc. Application Nos.841 & 842/2009 (In Consumer Complaint No.451/2007)
JudgeJustice Mr. S.B. Mhase, Hon’ble President Mr. S.R. Khanzode, Hon’ble Judicial Member
AppellantMr. Dinesh K. Suvarna Proprietor of Maruti Motors (Now Closed)
RespondentShri Avinash M. Gadre
Advocates:Mr. J.M. Baphna-Advocate @ Mr. Nagraj Hoskeri-Advocate for the appellant Mrs. Smita Sansare-Advocate for the respondent.
Excerpt:
oral order: per justice mr. s.b. mhase, honble president there is delay of 456 days in filing the appeal. but the service in the present matter is disputed. we have also noted that the service has been effected on some other person than the applicant through the courier. affidavit of service which has been filed also does not say that upon whom the service has been effected. there is no affidavit of the courier agency to support the affidavit of the original complainant. under these circumstances, we find that the service was not properly effected and, therefore, it is a case for condonation of delay. accordingly, delay is condoned. with the consent of the parties matter was taken up for hearing finally, since we have noticed while considering the delay application that there was no proper service. therefore, ex-parte disposal of the complaint by the district consumer forum requires to be set aside. however, we find that the complaint was pending for a pretty long period. therefore, even though we are inclined to give an opportunity to the applicant/appellant what we find is that they should be put to the terms and conditions. under these circumstances, we pass following order:- order 1. misc. application no.841/2009 for condonation of delay is allowed. 2. appeal is allowed on following terms:- 3. order passed by the district consumer forum in consumer complaint no.451/2007dated 05/12/2007 is hereby quashed and set aside and matter is remitted back to the district consumer forum. 4. we specifically direct both the parties to remain present before the district consumer forum on 30/11/2009. on 30/11/2009 applicant/ appellant shall file his reply to the complaint. he shall also file reply, documents, if any which he desires to rely upon in support of reply and to oppose complaint. he shall also file affidavit of evidence supporting his reply and his case. 5. copies of these documents shall be served on complainant on 30/11/2009 itself. complainant thereafter, shall file evidence, if any affidavit by way of affidavit or documents, if he desires, within a period of 5 days thereafter i.e.09/12/2009. 6. on 09/12/2009 itself the district consumer forum shall hear the matter finally and decide the matter. 7. misc.application no.842/2009 for stay stands disposed of. 8. district consumer forum is to act upon the steno copy. 9. copies of the order be furnished to the parties. 10. parties shall co-operate to district consumer forum for disposal as scheduled above.
Judgment:

Oral Order:

Per Justice Mr. S.B. Mhase, Honble President

There is delay of 456 days in filing the appeal. But the service in the present matter is disputed. We have also noted that the service has been effected on some other person than the applicant through the courier. Affidavit of service which has been filed also does not say that upon whom the service has been effected. There is no affidavit of the courier agency to support the affidavit of the original complainant. Under these circumstances, we find that the service was not properly effected and, therefore, it is a case for condonation of delay. Accordingly, delay is condoned.

With the consent of the parties matter was taken up for hearing finally, since we have noticed while considering the delay application that there was no proper service. Therefore, ex-parte disposal of the complaint by the District Consumer Forum requires to be set aside. However, we find that the complaint was pending for a pretty long period. Therefore, even though we are inclined to give an opportunity to the applicant/appellant what we find is that they should be put to the terms and conditions. Under these circumstances, we pass following order:-

Order

1. Misc. application no.841/2009 for condonation of delay is allowed.

2. Appeal is allowed on following terms:-

3. Order passed by the District Consumer Forum in consumer complaint no.451/2007dated 05/12/2007 is hereby quashed and set aside and matter is remitted back to the District Consumer Forum.

4. We specifically direct both the parties to remain present before the District Consumer Forum on 30/11/2009. On 30/11/2009 applicant/ appellant shall file his reply to the complaint. He shall also file reply, documents, if any which he desires to rely upon in support of reply and to oppose complaint. He shall also file affidavit of evidence supporting his reply and his case.

5. Copies of these documents shall be served on complainant on 30/11/2009 itself. Complainant thereafter, shall file evidence, if any affidavit by way of affidavit or documents, if he desires, within a period of 5 days thereafter i.e.09/12/2009.

6. On 09/12/2009 itself the District Consumer Forum shall hear the matter finally and decide the matter.

7. Misc.application no.842/2009 for stay stands disposed of.

8. District Consumer Forum is to act upon the steno copy.

9. Copies of the order be furnished to the parties.

10. Parties shall co-operate to District Consumer Forum for disposal as scheduled above.