Suncity Residents Welfare Association (Srwa) vs Suncity Maintenance Pvt Ltd

THIS Revision Petition has been filed by the Petitioner against the impugned order dated 4.4.2013 and 7.5.2013 by which Learned State Commission stayed operation of order of District Forum and proceedings in the complaint.

BRIEF facts of the case are that Complainant -Petitioner filed complaint before the District Forum with a prayer to direct the Opposite Party -Respondent to provide services in terms of Minutes of Meeting dated 26.6.2008 and other reliefs and compensation and on 2.1.2013 alongwith complaint, filed application for grant of ad interim order not to suspend the services and for compliance of the agreed terms of Minutes of the Meeting, Learned District Forum vide order dated 3.1.2013 while issuing notice of the application, ordered that Opposite Party shall be bound by the terms and conditions as per Minutes dated 26.6.2008. Opposite Party submitted objections before the District Forum on 3.4.2013 and also filed Revision Petition before State Commission and Learned State Commission vide impugned order dated 4.4.2013 stayed operation of impugned order dated 3.1.2013 and subsequently by order dated 7.5.2013 rectified typing mistake in the order dated 4.4.2013 and inserted the word "and" against which this Revision Petition has been filed.

HEARD Learned Counsel for the parties finally at admission stage and perused record. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that Learned State Commission committed error in passing impugned order dated 4.4.2013 in the light of Regulation 17 of the Consumer Protection Regulations, 2005, hence, Revision Petition be allowed and impugned order be set aside. On the other hand, Learned Counsel for Respondent submitted that orders passed by Learned State Commission are in accordance with Law as District Forum could not have granted relief prayed for in the complaint by ex -parte interim order, hence, Revision Petition be dismissed.

PERUSAL of record reveals that Learned District Forum vide order dated 3.1.2013 ordered that Opposite Party shall be bound by the terms and conditions as per the Minutes dated 26.6.2008 and Learned State Commission vide impugned order dated 4.4.2013 stayed operation of order dated 3.1.2013. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that as per Regulation 17, the ex -parte interim order stands vacated after 45 days if in the meanwhile objections to the interim order are not heard and disposed of. If according to Learned Counsel for the Petitioner, ex -parte interim order dated 3.1.2013 passed by District Forum stood vacated after 45 days, then, merely because the State Commission has passed impugned order dated 4.4.2013 staying operation of the order dated 3.1.2013, Petitioner should not have filed this Revision Petition to the extent challenging this order because in both the cases, order dated 3.1.2013 not remained in force. I do not find any illegality, irregularity or jurisdictional error in the impugned order dated 4.4.2013 staying operation of order dated 3.1.2013 and to this extent, Revision Petition is liable to be dismissed.

LEARNED Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that order dated 7.5.2013 passed by Learned State Commission inserting the word "and" is beyond the scope of application and in such circumstances, Revision Petition be allowed to this extent. On the other hand, Learned Counsel for the Respondent submitted that it was only a typing mistake which have been corrected by the Learned State Commission, hence, Revision Petition be dismissed. Strictly speaking, the order dated 7.5.2013 amounts to review of order dated 4.4.2013 as word "and" changes scope of order dated 4.4.2013 and as State Commission has no power to review its order, the impugned order dated 7.5.2013 is liable to be set aside. At this stage, I have not to examine on merits whether application filed by the Respondent before the State Commission includes relief granted by order dated 7.5.2013 or not because it may have impact on any subsequent application, if filed by the Respondent before the State Commission.

CONSEQUENTLY , Revision Petition filed by the Petitioner is partly allowed and order dated 7.5.2013 passed by Learned State Commission in RP No. 13/21 - M/s. Suncity Maintenance (P) Ltd. Vs. Suncity Residents Welfare Association, is set aside and Revision to the extent challenging order dated 4.4.2013, is dismissed at admission stage with no order as to costs.