Dr. C.J. Shantha Kumar vs Mr. T.M. Parameshwaraiah

A.S. Bopanna, J.—The petitioner is before this Court assailing the order dated 24.02.2012 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Davanagere, in C.C. No. 18/2012. The said complaint has been filed by the respondent herein. Since there was delay in filing the complaint, an application had been filed seeking condonation of delay. Even before directing notice to the petitioner herein, the Consumer Forum has considered the application and condoned the delay by a cryptic order and has thereafter issued notice to the petitioner herein. It is against the said order the petitioner is before this Court.

This Court taking note of the fact that the contention put forth by the petitioner is that an order had been passed without opportunity to the respondent had entertained the petition though the order was by the District Consumer Forum. In that view of the matter though the learned counsel for the respondent would contend that an appeal is provided u/s 15 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986, it would not be appropriate at this juncture to direct the petitioner to avail of the alternate remedy since the instant petition had been entertained and was pending before this Court. Further what is required to be corrected is only a procedural aspect which had not been followed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum and an opportunity be provided to the petitioner herein.

In that view, a perusal of the order dated 24.02.2012 on the face of it would indicate that the petitioner herein who was the respondent in the said proceedings had not been granted opportunity to meet the contentions put forth in the application seeking condonation of delay. In such event, since certain right had accrued to the petitioner to oppose the complaint on the question of delay as well, the Redressal Forum was required to grant opportunity to the petitioner.

Since the same has not been done and the delay has been condoned by a cryptic order, the order dated 24.02.2012 would not be sustainable. The same is accordingly quashed. The application filed by the respondent herein in C.C. No. 18/2012 seeking condonation of delay is restored to file. The petitioner is granted liberty to file objections to the said application whereupon the Redressal Forum may consider the same in accordance with law. The Redressal Forum shall provide such opportunity and dispose of the application in accordance with law within a period of two months from the date on which the parties appear before the Forum on the next date of hearing.

The petition stands disposed of accordingly.