w w w . L a w y e r S e r v i c e s . i n
Chairman Shivdan Singh Institute of Technology & Management Through Prof. S.H. Mohsin Director General v/s Vivek Kumar
Company & Directors' Information:- SH TECHNOLOGY PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U24100MH2009PTC190768
Company & Directors' Information:- KUMAR TECHNOLOGY PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U72300DL1998PTC096213
Company & Directors' Information:- VIVEK TECHNOLOGY PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U72400TN2002PTC049284
Company & Directors' Information:- H S MANAGEMENT INSTITUTE PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74140DL2005PTC141500
Company & Directors' Information:- A S INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U80302DL2005PTC140941
Company & Directors' Information:- KUMAR TECHNOLOGY PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U72300DL1998PTC096213
Company & Directors' Information:- VIVEK TECHNOLOGY PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U72400TN2002PTC049284
Company & Directors' Information:- H S MANAGEMENT INSTITUTE PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74140DL2005PTC141500
Company & Directors' Information:- A S INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U80302DL2005PTC140941
Revision Petition No. 764 of 2014
Decided On, 22 September 2014
At, National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
By, THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. CHAUDHARI
By, PRESIDING MEMBER
For the Petitioner: Mohd. Kausar Perwez, Advocate. For the Respondent: V.V. Singh, C. Anjali, Advocates.
Judgment Text
K.S. Chaudhari, Presiding Member
This Revision Petition has been filed by the Petitioner against order dated 16.4.2014 passed by Learned State Commission in Appeal No. 307 of 2010- Chairman Shivdan Singh VS. Vivek Kumar, by which appeal was dismissed in default.
Complainant- Respondent filed complaint before District Forum and Learned District Forum allowed complaint and directed Opposite Party- Petitioner to pay to the Complainant- Respondent, Rs. 60,000/- with interest and further awarded Rs. 1,000/- as litigation cost. Appeal filed by the Opposite Party was dismissed by Learned State Commission by impugned order against which this Revision Petition has been filed.
Heard Learned Counsel for the parties finally at admission stage and perused record.
Learned Counsel for Petitioner submitted that appeal has been dismissed in default without intimation to the Petitioner, hence, impugned order be set aside and matter may be remanded back. On the other hand, Learned Counsel for Respondent submitted that Petitioner should have seen cause-list on the web-site and submitted that order passed by Learned State Commission is in accordance with Law, hence, Revision Petition be dismissed.
Perusal of impugned order reveals that appeal has been dismissed on account of non-appearance of Petitioner before State Commission in spite of up-loading cause-list on web-site of State Commission. This order, nowhere, says that notice was given to the Petitioner. Merely because cause-list has been uploaded, notice to the Petitioner cannot be presumed. In number of cases, we have observed that State Commission should not have dismissed appeals on the basis of up-loading cause-list on the web-site. As appeal has been dismissed without proper intimation to the Petitioner, impugned order is liable to be set aside.
Consequently, Revision Petition filed by the Petitioner is allowed and impugned order dated 16.4.2013 passed by Learned State Commission in Appeal No. 307 of 2010- Chairman Shivdan Singh VS. Vivek Kumar, is set aside and appeal is restore
This Revision Petition has been filed by the Petitioner against order dated 16.4.2014 passed by Learned State Commission in Appeal No. 307 of 2010- Chairman Shivdan Singh VS. Vivek Kumar, by which appeal was dismissed in default.
Complainant- Respondent filed complaint before District Forum and Learned District Forum allowed complaint and directed Opposite Party- Petitioner to pay to the Complainant- Respondent, Rs. 60,000/- with interest and further awarded Rs. 1,000/- as litigation cost. Appeal filed by the Opposite Party was dismissed by Learned State Commission by impugned order against which this Revision Petition has been filed.
Heard Learned Counsel for the parties finally at admission stage and perused record.
Learned Counsel for Petitioner submitted that appeal has been dismissed in default without intimation to the Petitioner, hence, impugned order be set aside and matter may be remanded back. On the other hand, Learned Counsel for Respondent submitted that Petitioner should have seen cause-list on the web-site and submitted that order passed by Learned State Commission is in accordance with Law, hence, Revision Petition be dismissed.
Perusal of impugned order reveals that appeal has been dismissed on account of non-appearance of Petitioner before State Commission in spite of up-loading cause-list on web-site of State Commission. This order, nowhere, says that notice was given to the Petitioner. Merely because cause-list has been uploaded, notice to the Petitioner cannot be presumed. In number of cases, we have observed that State Commission should not have dismissed appeals on the basis of up-loading cause-list on the web-site. As appeal has been dismissed without proper intimation to the Petitioner, impugned order is liable to be set aside.
Consequently, Revision Petition filed by the Petitioner is allowed and impugned order dated 16.4.2013 passed by Learned State Commission in Appeal No. 307 of 2010- Chairman Shivdan Singh VS. Vivek Kumar, is set aside and appeal is restore
Please Login To View The Full Judgment!
d at its original number and Learned State Commission is directed to decide appeal after given an opportunity of being heard to both the parties. Parties are directed to appear before the State Commission on 30.10.2014.