Mrs. Vasanthi Thiagarajan, Principal, Sishya School vs R. Nageswaran

S. Palanivelu, J.—The revision petitioner is the respondent in C.O.P. No. 27 of 2007 on the file of the learned District Consumer Disputes

Redressal Forum, Dharmapuri @ Krishnagiri. Since he did not appear before the said Forum, he was set exparte and on 11.05.2007 an exparte

order was passed against him directing to pay a sum of Rs. 50,000/- to the complainant to compensate his mental agony and unrest and also a sum

of Rs. 5,000/- towards cost of the proceeding within six weeks. The revision petitioner thereafter, filed an application to set aside the exparte

decree along with an application u/s 5 of the Limitation Act, praying to condone the delay of 83 days in filing the application to set aside the

exparte order. The above said Forum returned the applications stating that there is no power vested with the Forum to set aside the exparte order

under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. Aggrieved by the said order, the present revision is preferred.

Mr. V.R. Shanmuganathan, learned cousnel appearing for the revision petitioner would submit that even though there is no specific provision in

the Consumer Protection Act, there is no impediment for the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum to condone the delay and set aside the

exparte order. In fact, in the previous proceedings, this Court has taken a view that such a power could be excercised even by the Consumer

Redressal Forum and appropriate relief has necessarily to be granted to the aggrieved party. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on the

decision reported in The Manager, Indian Bank and Others Vs. District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum and Another, wherein while dealing

with the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 13(2) and (4) of the Act and Rules 88 and 89 of the Tamil Nadu, it has been

observed that the power given to decide the complaint exparte implies to power the set aside such exparte order or decision. In para-9, it has

been held thus

when the Consumer Protection Forum has got the power to decide a complaint ex parte under Rule 8(8) and 8(9) of the Rules, it automatically

implies that it has got power to set aside an ex parte order. The District Consumer Forum and the State Consumer Forum have got power to

entertain the applications to set aside ex parte orders and decide the same on merits. It is also settled law that when there is error in exercise of

jurisdiction, this Court can always come in by exercising the power under Article 227 of the Constitution. As rightly pointed out by the learned

Counsel for the petitioners, and fairly conceded by Mr. D.I.J. Rajkumar though there is no express provision in the Act or the Rules framed there

under giving the forum jurisdiction to do so, it is well known rule of statutory construction that the Forum should be considered to be endowed with

such ancillary or incidental powers as are necessary to discharge its functions for the purpose of rendering justice between the parties.

In view of the above said decision, this Court can exercise the powers under Article 227 of the Constitution of India and direct the District

Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum to take up the petition filed praying to condone the delay in filing the application to set aside the exparte

order along with application to set aside the exparte order, as it has got power to decide the same and there is no obstacle for the District

Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum to entertain those applications and dispose of them in accordance with the procedure.

In the light of the above discussions, the civil revision petition is allowed and the petitioner is directed to represent the papers, which had already

been returned by the Forum within four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The Forum is directed to take the petitions on file and

decide them on merits after affording opportunity to both parties. The registry is directed to return the original papers filed by the petitioner to

enable him to represent the same before the District Consumer Forum.