STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, PUNJAB, CHANDIGARH.

Date of institution : 11.10.2024 Reserved On : 17.02.2025 Date of decision : 10.03.2025 Blue Dart Express Limited, Sahar Airport Road, near Hyatt Regency, Ashok Nagar, Andheri East, Mumbai (Maharashtra)-400099, through its Authorized Signatory Mr. Abhimanyyu Nirulaa, Manager Legal, available at Blue Dart Express Limited, 4^th Floor, Elegance Tower, Plot No.8, Jasolla, District Center, New Delhi.

….Petitioner/OP No.3 Versus

1. Kalpna wife of Sarabjit Singh, resident of Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar, Street No.17A, B, Near Onkar Nagar, Phagwara, District Kapurthala, Punjab-144401. ….Respondent/Complainant

2. Bangalore Refinery Pvt. Ltd., 61, Plot No.20A, 1^st Cross, 1^st Phase, KIABD Main Road, Peenya Industrial Estate, Bangalore, Karnataka-560058, through its Managing Director/

Authorized Representative.

3. Tata Unistore Limited, 4^th Floor, B Wing, Empire, Plaza-II, LBS Road, Vikhroli, Mumbai Suburban, Maharashtra, 400083, through its Managing Director/Authorized Representative.

…Respondents/OPs No.1 & 2 Revision Petition under Section 47 (1) (b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 against the order dated 30.04.2024 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Kapurthala.

Quorum:-

Hon’ble Mrs. Justice Daya Chaudhary, President Ms. Simarjot Kaur, Member Mr. Vishav Kant Garg, Member

1) Whether Reporters of the Newspapers may be allowed to see the Judgment? Yes/No

2) To be referred to the Reporters or not? Yes/No

3) Whether judgment should be reported in the Digest? Yes/No Present:-

For the Petitioner : Sh. Sanjeev Goyal, Advocate For Respondent No.1 : Sh. Harshiv Kundra, Advocate.

JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY, PRESIDENT The present Revision Petition has been filed by the Petitioner/OP No.3 under Section 47 (1) (b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (in short, ‘the Act’) being aggrieved by the impugned order dated 30.04.2024 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Kapurthala (in short, “the District Commission”), whereby the Petitioner had been proceeded ex parte.

2. It would be apposite to mention here that hereinafter the parties will be referred, as had been arrayed before the District Commission.

3. Briefly, the facts of the case, which are necessary for the disposal of the present Revision Petition, are that the Respondent No.1/Complainant had filed the Complaint before the District Commission, wherein the notices were issued to the OPs on 04.03.2024 for 12.04.2024. OP No.2 had appeared through Counsel. However, the notice sent to OPs No.1 & 3 had been received with the report ‘Item Delivered’ as per Postal Tracking Report. The case was adjourned to 30.04.2024 for filing written version by OP No.2 as well as for awaiting OPs No.1 & 3. However, none had appeared on behalf of OPs No.1 & 3 and as such they were proceeded ex parte vide order dated 30.04.2024, which is reproduced as under “Counsel for OP No.2 filed written reply along with exhibited documents Ex.RW2/A. Copy supplied to Counsel for Complainant. Today the case was fixed for awaiting OPs No.1 & 3. Case called several times since morning. It is already 4.00 P.M. but none has appeared on behalf of OPs No.1 & 3. So, OPs No.1 & 3 are proceeded against ex parte. Adjourned to 31.05.2024 for filing rejoinder to the written reply by OP no.2.”

4. Said the order dated 30.04.2024 passed by the District Commission has been challenged by the Petitioner/OP No.3 by way of filing the present Revision Petition by raising a number of arguments.

5. There was a delay of 73 days in filing of the appeal. Misc. Application No.1269 of 2024 was filed for condonation of delay, which was supported by an affidavit. Said application was allowed vide order dated 05.02.2025 and the delay in filing of the appeal was condoned subject to costs of 3,000/- to be deposited in the Consumer Legal Aid ₹

Account of this Commission.

6. Mr. Sanjeev Goyal, learned Counsel for the Petitioner/OP No.3 has submitted that no notice was r