CourtKutchehry.com
Tribunals and CommissionsSingle Bench(2020) 11 NCDRC CK 0016

Golden Trust Financial Services vs New India Assurance Company Ltd. & 2 Ors.

National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission · Decided on 12 November 2020

HON’BLE JUDGES
V.K. Jain, Presiding Member
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Revision Petition No. 991 Of 2020

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

6 paragraphs · 333 words
1.

An appeal was preferred by New India Assurance Company before the State Commission against three persons, including the petitioner Golden Trust Financial Services.  Vide order No. 08 dated 06.1.2020, the State Commission directed as under:

"Learned Advocate for Appellant is present. None appears on behalf of the Respondent. Fix 24.6.2020 for ex parte hearing."

2.

Being aggrieved from the order passed by the State Commission, the petitioner is before this Commission.

3.

In my opinion, even if the petitioner was not present on 06.1.2020, it is always open to its counsel to appear before the State Commission on any subsequent date of hearing and argue the matter on behalf of the petitioner.  The State Commission, despite absence of the petitioner on 06.1.2020, did not decide the appeal on merits, rather the appeal was adjourned to 24.6.2020 for ex-parte hearing.  The State Commission was dealing with an appeal and not with the original consumer complaint.  Therefore, if no-one was present for the petitioner on a particular date of hearing, the State Commission could have heard the other parties and decided the appeal on merits.  But, having not decided the appeal on merits and having deferred the matter for hearing, the State Commission cannot disallow the petitioner Golden Trust Financial Services from appearing on any subsequent hearing and placing its case before the State Commission.  It is therefore, clarified that despite the order passed by the State Commission on 06.1.2020, the petitioner shall be entitled to appear before the State Commission and argue the appeal on merits.

The Revision Petition stands disposed of accordingly.

4.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the matter is listed today before the State Commission for hearing.  If this is so, the local counsel can convey this order to the State Commission and either argue the appeal if allowed by the State Commission, on the basis of his oral submission, or he may seek an adjournment for submitting a copy of this order to the State Commission.