GAUTAM BARUA Vs. ABHI TECHNOLOGIES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition challenges the order dated 01.11.2006 of the Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Delhi (in short, 'the State Commission') in Appeal no. A-795 of 2006. By this order, the State Commission allowed the appeal of the Opposite Party (M/s Abhi Technologies) against the order dated 12.10.2004 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum II, Mehrauli, New Delhi (in short, 'the District Forum') in complaint case no. 1199 of 2003, by which the District Forum held the following:

(2.) We have heard Ms. Shweta Garg, learned counsel for the petitioner. By order dated 28.09.2011, this Commission had already directed to proceed with the petition and treat the respondent as ex parte, because, there was no representation on its behalf on that date, though the learned counsel for the respondent had been duly served.

(3.) The illegality of the State Commission's impugned order is writ large. First, though the respondent filed the appeal before the State Commission sometime in August September 2006 against the District Forum's order dated 12.10.2004, the State Commission entertained the appeal without the respondent/appellant having even sought condonation of delay of nearly one year and eight months. Secondly, as pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner/complainant, the appeal was filed against the principal order dated 12.10.2004 of the District Forum which was being executed before the District Forum since February 2006. In fact, in the course of the execution proceedings, the respondent had appeared before the District Forum on various dates, accepted the award and sought two weeks on 11.08.2006 to comply with the order dated 12.10.2004. Even then the State Commission entertained the respondents appeal against the order dated 12.10.2004 of the District Forum. Finally, it is absolutely clear that the State Commission passed the impugned order by setting aside the order dated 12.10.2004 of the District Forum and remanding the matter for fresh adjudication without even issuing notice to the petitioner.