SUSHRUT ELECTRONICS PVT LTD Vs. CONSUMER PROTECTION COUNCIL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WE find no merit at all in this appeal. The State Commission has elaborately dealt with the evidence adduced in the case and passed the Order which, in our opinion, is perfectly valid, correct and sound. The appellant herein, who was the Opposite Party before the State Commission did not at all participate in the proceedings before the State Commission and no objections were filed by them in spite of service of notice. Nor did it appear and contest despite the case having been posted on more than two occasions. In the circumstances, the State Commission considered the evidence that was adduced before it and decided the case on merits.

(2.) IT is also to be mentioned that a Representative of the Opposite Party was present before the State Commission on two occasions when the case was heard and it is seen from the Order of the State Commission that the direction for payment of Rs. 23,000/- had been made on the basis of the consent given by the said Representative of the Opposite Party. The State Commission had also before it a letter dated 5th April, 1991 sent by the Opposite Party to the respondent No. 2 agreeing to pay Rs. 23,000/- as against the claim of Rs. 64,000/- put forward in the Complaint Petition. It was because of the consent given by the Representative of the appellant that the State Commission restricted its award to Rs. 23,000/- even though the complainant had claimed a much larger amount. Such being the petition, the appellant is not entitled to contest the decision rendered on consent by the State Commission by filing this appeal.