HDFC BANK LIMITED OFFICE AT HDFC BANK HOUSE,SENAPTI NBAPAT MARG, LOWER PAREL (WEST) NEW DELHI Vs. PAPPULAL JHA & ANR. S/O SHRI MAHODAV JHAM PRESENTLY RESIDING AT 48, R.S SHYAM, NAGAR, NANGAL JAISA BOHRA, JHOTWARA, JAIPUR RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition has filed against the order dated 07.10.2013 passed by Rajasthan State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Jaipur (short, State Commission ) in F.A. No.933/2013.

(2.) The petitioner has assailed the impugned order of the State Commission on two counts. Firstly, it is contended that the impugned order is non-speaking and is violation of natural justice. On merits, it is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the State Commission while dismissing the appeal on the ground of limitation, the State Commission ignored the fact that the petitioner was wrongly proceeded ex-parte as he was not served with the notice of the complaint. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further contended that the petitioner came to know about the order of the District Forum dated 21.06.2011 only when the police visited the Branch Office of the petitioner bank for execution of the warrant of arrest of the then Manager issued in the execution proceedings. Ongoing to know about the impugned order, the petitioner promptly applied for the certified copy of the order and the record of the complaint and on the receipt of the record on 07.08.2013, the appeal was filed in the State Commission in Sept., 2013.

(3.) The respondents failed to put in appearance despite notice of service of the revision petition. Accordingly, the respondents were proceeded ex-parte.