CHEMICAL WORKS AND ORS Vs. STATE OF H P AND ORS
LAWS(HPCDRC)-2010-5-15
HIMACHAL PRADESH STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
Decided on May 26,2010

Chemical Works And Ors Appellant
VERSUS
State Of H P And Ors Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) THIS appeal is directed against the order dated 27.10.2009, passed by District Forum, Kangra at Dharamshala in Consumer Complaint No. 195/2007. By means of impugned order complaint has been dismissed.
(2.) SH . Jaryal had filed this complaint and he was summoned by this Commission vide order dated 25.3.2010. This order is in the following terms : - " It has transpired that the State of Himachal Pradesh in the complaint has been sued through the Secretary, HPSEB. Let learned counsel Mr. K.S.Jaryal who filed this complaint satisfy us as to how the State has been sued through the Secretary HPSEB. Notice be issued to Mr. K.S.Jaryal, Advocate for his personal appearance on 26.5.2010. Prima facie this is a clear cut case of deficiency in service, on the part of the learned counsel, when he filed the complaint. While issuing notice to Mr. Jaryal, copy of this order will be attached by the office. Notice upon Mr. Jaryal to be served through the Process Server of District Forum, Kangra at Dharamshala. Mr. L.S.Negi, ADA who was present in the court has been directed to appear for the State and assist us in this matter. Mr. Sanjay Jaswal, Advocate is directed to supply a compete copy of paper book of this case to Mr. L.S.Negi, ADA."
(3.) SH . Jaryal who is present today stated that due to bonafide in -advertent typographical mistake, State of H.P. was sued through Secretary H.P.S E. B instead of H.P.S.E.B through its Secretary, Shimla. Thus he prayed that on his oral request instead of respondent No.1. as shown in the complaint, H.P.State Electricity Board through its Secretary, Kumar House, Shimla may be ordered to be substituted. This prayer was resisted by Mr. Chandel who stated that when it was not made the party before District Forum below, how it can be substituted in this appeal. Thus according to him this prayer needs to be turned down. For the order we propose to pass finally in the appeal, it is felt that the prayer to substitute respondent No.1 in this appeal i.e H.P.State Electricity Board through it Secretary, Kumar House, Shimla, needs to be allowed by substituting it in place of the said respondent, as well as O.P. No.1 in the complaint. Ordered accordingly.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.