A. GOYAL Vs. JAIDEV AGGARWAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present Revision Petition, under Section 21(b) of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short "the Act"?) has been filed against the order dated 13.05.2016 of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Punjab (for short "the State Commission"?) in Appeal No.595 of 2012 whereby the said Appeal against the order dated 08.03.2011 of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, SAS Nagar, Mohali, (for short "the District Forum"?) in Complaint No.28 of 2011 was dismissed.

(2.) The brief history of the matter is that the Respondent No.1 (hereinafter called as "the Complainant"?) had filed a Complaint against the Petitioner and Respondent No.2. Vide order dated 08.03.2011, his Complaint was allowed ex parte against the Petitioner and the Respondent No.2 since both the Petitioner and the Respondent No.2 did not attend the proceedings before the District Forum despite service of process. Before the District Forum, the evidences were led only by the Complainant and no evidence or defence was put up by the Petitioner or the Respondent No.2. The Petitioner filed an Appeal before the State Commission. The Appeal was delayed. The application for condonation of delay in the said Appeal was dismissed and the Appeal was also dismissed in limine. The Petitioner challenged the order of dismissal of his Appeal in limine before this Commission vide Revision Petition No.4878 of 2012 titled as A. Goyal Vs. Jaidev Aggarwal and this Commission allowed the Revision Petition, condoned the delay in filing the Appeal and directed the State Commission to decide the Appeal on merits.

(3.) Thereafter, after hearing the parties, i.e., the Petitioner and the Complainant, the impugned order has been passed by the State Commission. It is pertinent to note that Respondent no.2 did not contest the Appeal and did not attend the proceedings before the State Commission.