STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION PUNJAB, DAKSHIN MARG, SECTOR 37-A, CHANDIGARH Date of Institution : 01.09.2025 Date of Decision : 28.10.2025 Shalimar Paints Limited, through its Authorized Representative Valwant Singh (Aadhar No.2701 9194 6096)

Head Office at :- 4^th Floor, Olethia Business Spaces, Plot No.A-184- 185, Road No.162, Opposite Ashar IT Park, Wagle Industrial Estate, Thane, West Mumbai.

…..Petitioner/Opposite Party No.1 Versus

1. M/s Trig Guard Force Limited, Shitladevi Chs D-3/4/5/6, Ground Floor, India Oil Nagar, DN Nagar, Maharashtra, through its Athorized Person Sunaina Sambyal.

2. The White Medical College and Hospital, Village Bungal Pathankot, through its M.D. and Authorized Person Sunaina Sambyal.

…..Respondents No.1&2/Complainants

2. M/s Gupta Brothers, R/o Ghass Mandi Road, Near Vaishkarma Chownk, Sujanpur, District Pathankot-145023.

….. Respondent No.3/Opposite Party No.2 Revision Petition under Section 47 (1)(B) of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 for setting aside the order dated 01.01.2025 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Pathankot.

Quorum:-

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

For the Petitioner :Sh. Mahir Malhotra, Advocate for Sh. S.K. Chaudhary, Advocate For Respondents No.1&2 : Sh. Danish Mahajan, Advocate

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 JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY, PRESIDENT:-

The Petitioner/Opposite Party No.1 i.e. Shalimar Paints Limited, through its Authorized Representative has filed the present Revision Petition under Section 47 (1)(B) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (in short the “Act”) for setting aside the impugned order dated 01.01.2025 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Pathankot (hereinafter called as the “District Commission”), whereby the Petitioner/OP No.1 had been proceeded exparte.

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

3. There was delay of 152 days in filing of the Appeal. I.A. No.1043 of 2025 was filed for condonation of delay alongwith supporting affidavit. Said Application was allowed subject to payment of cost of Rs.6000/-. Said Application was disposed off accordingly.

The Petitioner had deposited said cost of Rs.6000/- on 24.10.2024.

4. Briefly, the facts of the case are that Respondents No.1 & 2/Complainants filed Consumer Complaint before the District Commission. Notices were issued to the OPs through registered post.

However, said notices were not received back served or otherwise and the following order was passed :-

“1/1/2025 Present : None for the parties.

The notices sent to the Opposite Parties have not been received back or otherwise. Since more than 30 days have elapsed and no one has put in appearance for OP No.1 & 2 as such OP No.1 and 2 are proceeded exparte. Now this matter adjourned to 28/3/225 for exparte arguments. Due to power cut this order has been written by hand.”

5. Said order dated 01.01.2025 has been challenged by the Petitioner/OP No.1 by way of filing the present Revision Petition by raising a number of grounds.

6. Mr. Mahir Malhotra Advocate while appearing on behalf of Mr. S.K. Chaudhary Advocate, learned Counsel for the Petitioner has submitted that the Petitioner could not appear before the District Commission as the circumstances were beyond his control. Learned Counsel has further submitted that in the last week of July, 2025, the legal team at Mumbai was in the process of completing the routine internal legal audit of the pending cases wherein notice dated 20.11.2024 was kept in another case file pertaining to a legal matter pending before the Court at Delhi. Thereafter, OP No.1 had informed its Counsel at Delhi and further local Counsel at Pathankot was engaged in the