STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION CHANDIGARH REVISION PETITION NO. SC/4/RP/56/2024 CCS REAL ESTATE PRIVATE LIMITED PRESENT ADDRESS - CCS REAL ESTATE PRIVATE LIMITED HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT B 210 2ND FLOOR ELANTE OFFICE, INDUSTRIAL AREA PHASE I, CHANDIGARH ,CHANDIGARH. .......Petitioner(s)

Versus RAJESH KUMAR AND ORS PRESENT ADDRESS - RAJESH KUMAR S/O SHRI KISHAN LAL, R/O H NO 594, 1ST FLOOR, SECTOR 8, CHANDIARH ,CHANDIGARH.

.......Respondent(s)

BEFORE:

HON'BLE MRS. PADMA PANDEY , PRESIDING MEMBER HON'BLE MR. PREETINDER SINGH , MEMBER FOR THE PETITIONER:

CCS REAL ESTATE PRIVATE LIMITED DATED: 20/03/2025

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, U.T.

CHANDIGARH [ADDITIONAL BENCH]

============

Revision Petition No. : RP/56/2024 Date of Institution : 11/10/2024 Date of Decision : 20/03/2025 CCS Real Estates Pvt. Ltd. , having its registered office at B-210, 2 nd Floor, Elante Offices, Industrial Area-I, Chandigarh – 160 002 through its Managing Director Sunil Kumar; Sunil Kumar Chahal s/o Tara Chand, Resident of Flat No. 202, Carnation Block, Amravati Enclave, Pinjore, District Panchkula –

134107 (Haryana).

…… Petitioner V E R S U S

1. Rajesh Kumar ^{son of Sh.Krishan Lal, Resident of House No. 594, 1} st Floor, Sector 8-B, Chandigarh – 160008 (U.T).

2. , PAN: AANCA9845R, having its M/s Address Infrastructures Pvt. Ltd.

Regd. Office at Sector 17, PR-4, Near International Cricket Stadium, New Chandigarh, Mullanpur, District S.A.S. Nagar, through its Managing Director – Amit Mangla.

3. , PAN: ABAFP9650Q, having its Regd. Office at M/s Punjab Buildcon Office No. 8, Second Floor, SCO 86, above Sundar Emporium, Sector

35-C, Chandigarh. …… Respondents BEFORE: MRS. PADMA PANDEY PRESIDING MEMBER PREETINDER SINGH MEMBER PRESENT : Sh. Gaurav Deep Goel, Advocate for the Revision Petitioner.

Sh. Kanwar Yuvraj Singh, Advocate along with Sh. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate for the Respondent No.1/Complainant.

None for Respondent No.2.

Sh. Jagdeep Singh Jaswal, Advocate for Respondent No.3.

PER PREETINDER SINGH, MEMBER

1. The Revision Petitioner has moved misc. application bearing no. MA/907/2024 for condoning the delay in filing the Revision Petition. The cause shown is sufficient. The delay is condoned and the Revision Petition shall be treated to be within time. Accordingly, MA/907/2024 stands disposed of.

2. This Revision Petition is filed against the order dated 15.02.2023, rendered by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I, U.T. Chandigarh (for brevity hereinafter to be referred as the “Ld. District Commission”) in Consumer Complaint bearing No.CC/955/2022, whereby the Opposite Party No.1 (‘Petitioner’ herein) was ordered to be proceeded against ex-parte, in the following terms: -

“…………… Office report seen. OP No.1 has not turned up despite proper service at 1^st address which has also been confirmed through track consignment report. OP No.1 has refused to accept the service on 2^nd address. Refusal is a due service. Hence, OP No.1 is proceeded against ex-

parte.”

The Petitioner/Opposite Party No.1 by way of present Revision Petition, inter alia, prayed for the following relief: -

“……….. It is humbly prayed that the present Revision Petition be allowed and the order dated 15.02.2023 passed by the Ld. District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I, Chandigarh in C.C. No. 955 of 2022, Rajesh Kumar Vs. CCS Real Estate Private Limited and Ors. be set aside in the interest of justice and fair play.”

3. The only issue in this Revision Petition relates to initiation of ex-parte proceedings by the Ld. District Commission against Petitioner/ Opposite Party No.1 on its failure to appear despite due service. The merits of this case, therefore, need not be discussed.

4. Pursuant to notice, Respondents appeared through their respective counsels and contested the revision petition with vehemence.

5. Heard the Learned Counsel for the parties and carefully gone through the record with utmost care and circumspection.

6. According to section 38(3)(b)(ii)