ANIL TEXTORIUM PVT LTD Vs. RAJIV NIRANJANBHAI MEHTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Revision Petition has arisen out of the Order dated 21.11.1996 passed by the Gujarat State Commission in C.M.A. No. 13/95 in Complainant No. 13/95.

(2.) ONE Mr. Rajiv N. Mehta filed a Complaint No. 13/95 before the State Commission alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practices adopted by the Opposite Party in its Sales Promotion Scheme. The Complainant stated that the Opposite Party invited members of general public to be a member on payment of the amount shown as holding members investment as against the particular item, but that member has to enrol new members for such sales scheme, that the member will get the refund of the amount paid by him only on enrolment of new members and the member will be given the ordered item free of charge on priority basis. The complainant alleged various flaws in the scheme and unfair trade practice. The Complainant submitted that the Opposite Party had registered as many as 1200 members under their sales promotion scheme which is the subject matter of the dispute in the complaint. It was pleaded that the names and addresses of the members under the scheme are very much necessary to pass final orders in the complaint but those particulars are in exclusive possession of the Opposite Party. The Complainant has moved an application for directions for production of certain documents invoking the provisions of Section 13(4) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The Complainant later moved an application praying that he may be permitted to prosecute the complaint under Order 1 Rule 8 of the Code of Civil Procedure read with Section 13 of the Consumer Protection Act in a representative capacity for the benefit of the persons/members who are similarly situated and interested in the scheme. That application was strongly opposed on behalf of the Opposite Party.

(3.) BEING aggrieved of the Order passed by the State Commission, the Opposite Party has filed this Revision Petition challenging the permission granted to the Complainant under Order 1 Rule 8 of the C.P.C. We had heard Mr. Huzefa Ahmadi, Advocate for the Petitioner and Mr. Rajiv V. Mehta who appeared in person and have also gone through the records.