EUREKA FORBES LTD Vs. D K MONGA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) -THIS appeal arises from the order dated 17. 1. 2008 passed by the District Forum whereby the application of the appellant for deciding the complaint of the respondent in which the pleadings were complete on merits and not by way of dismissal in default was rejected. On the face of it the impugned order suffers from inherent infirmity as the District Forum has observed that the respondent cannot be asked to produce the machines lying with him. If it was so, the District forum could have exercised the jurisdiction of deciding the complaint on merit once the pleadings were complete instead of dismissing it.

(2.) WE have been impressing upon the District Forums that whenever the complaints and the pleadings reach the final stage after undergoing the mill of pleadings and affidavits by way of evidence which is very time consuming, the District Forum should always decide the complaints on merits. Sub-clause 2 (c) of Section 13 of the Consumer Protection Act provides that whereby the complainant fails to appear on the date of hearing before the District Forum, the District Forum may either dismiss the complaint for default or decide it on merits. Discretion should always be exercised in favour of deciding the complaint on merits so as to avoid converting it into a shuttle cock.

(3.) INSTANT case was a fit case where the complaint should have been decided on merit. At the outset, we allow the appeal, set aside the impugned order and send back the matter to the District Forum with the direction to the District Forum to decide the complaint in question on merits.