TATA FINANCE LIMITED vs SURINDER LAL OHRI

THIS is an appeal directed against order dated 19.6.2002 passed in Complaint Case No. 927 of 1999 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-II (for short hereinafter referred to as the District Forum). The District Forum allowed the complaint and directed the O.Ps. to refund to the complainant a sum of Rs. 5,380/- with interest @ 9% per annum from 20.1.1999 till payment and awarded a sum of Rs. 1,000/- as compensation for mental and physical harassment and also directed the O.Ps. to pay a sum of Rs. 500/- as expenses and litigation costs.

THE appellant was impleaded as O.P. No. 2 in the complaint case. THE complaint was proceeded ex parte against the appellant. THE appellant filed this appeal beyond the prescribed period of limitation and sought condonation of delay in filing the appeal which was allowed vide order dated 4.7.2003 on the ground that the appellant did not receive notice of the complaint case which had been issued by the District Forum and even the impugned order passed by the District Forum was not communicated to the appellant. THE appellant came to know about the impugned order in execution case when appearance was made for the first time on 18.3.2003. THE certified copy of the order was applied for and thereafter the appeal was filed. The sole ground urged by the learned Counsel Mr. Sandeep Suri, Advocate for the appellant is the non-receipt of the notice of the complaint case. The original file of the complaint case was summoned from the District Forum and its perusal shows that the notice issued to O.P. No. 2 had not been received back undelivered and a presumption was raised by the District Forum about its reaching the appellant/O.P. No. 2. Since none was present on behalf of O.P. No. 2, the complaint case was ordered to proceed ex parte on 7.2.2000 for which date the notice had been issued by the District Forum. The address of the appellant mentioned in the complaint case was as under : "Tata Finance Limited, 4th Floor, New Delhi House, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi."

In the grounds of appeal, it has been contended that the offices of the appellant were shifted in the third week of September, 1999 to a new premises and the new address was as under : "Tata Finance Limited, 4th Floor, Kanchanjunga Building, Cannaught Place, New Delhi."

IT was specifically mentioned in Ground No. 5 that no notice of complaint was received by Tata Finance Limited. The learned Counsel for the respondent/complainant, on the other hand, submitted that a big Company like Tata Finance Limited cannot be expected to shift its office without informing the concerned Post Office and had this been done, the Post Office would have diverted the notice to the new address. IT was also contended that the appellant did not notify the change in address in the newspaper or through other media. These arguments are presumptive in nature and the same cannot be accepted as rebuttal of the averment of the appellant regarding the change of address in the third week of September, 1999. Since the appellant did not receive the notice of the complaint case, it was prevented from filing its reply to the allegations made in the complaint case. IT is the case where the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from contesting the complaint case on merit. Resultantly, we find considerable merit in this appeal regarding the denial of opportunity to contest the complaint case due to the non-service of notice to the appellant. The appeal is allowed. The impugned order is set aside insofar as the appellant Tata Finance Limited/O.P. No. 2 is concerned and the Complaint Case No. 927 of 1999 is remanded to the District Forum-II, U.T., Chandigarh for permitting the appellant/O.P. No. 2 of the complaint case to file written statement to the complaint case and then to adjudicate and decide the complaint case within the time frame allowed under the C.P. Act as amended and also keeping into consideration the directions of the Hon''ble Apex Court made in the case of Dr. J.J. Merchant & Ors. v. Shrinath Chaturvedi, III (2002) CPJ 8 (SC)=IV (2002) SLT 714=1986-2002 Consumer 6792 (NS). The appellant and the respondent No. 1/complainant are directed to appear before the District Forum-II, U.T., Chandigarh on 31.7.2003. Copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge. Appeal allowed.