IN THE DELHI STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION Date of Institution: 21.02.2024 Date of Hearing: 30.10.2025 Date of Decision: 12.11.2025 FIRST APPEAL NO.-124/2024 IN THE MATTER OF AU SMALL FINANCE BANK LIMITED HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT

19-A, DHULESHWAR GARDEN, AJMER ROAD JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN-302001 THROUGH ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER SH. SANDEEP SINGH HAVING ITS EMPLOYEE CODE: 202645 MOBILE NO. 9999740549 E MAIL ID-sanadeep.singh18@aubank.in BRANCH OFFICE PLOT NO 186 PATPARGANJ INDUSTRIAL AREA DELHI-110091 (Through: Mr. Sandeep Sharma, Advocate)

…Appellant VERSUS DEEPAK CHADHA SH. SH. SURRENDER MOHAN CHADHA R/O D-229, UPPER GROUND FLOOR FLAT NO. A-2, MOHAN GARDERN GURUDWARA ROAD, NAWADA UTTAM NAGAR, DEW DELHI-110059 (Through: Mr. Gaurav Chadha, Advocate)

…Respondent CORAM:

HON’BLE JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL (PRESIDENT)

HON’BLE MS. BIMLA KUMARI, MEMBER (JUDICIAL)

Present: Mr. Ayush Anand, proxy counsel for Mr. Sandeep Sharma, Counsel for the appellant (Enrl. No. D/11530/2025, Mobile: 9851898514, 8526767673 Email:

advsandeepsharma@gmail.com)

Mr. Gaurav Chadha, Counsel for the respondent (Enrl. No. D/6744/2017, Mobile: 9810341984, Email:

adv.gauravchadha@gmail.com) appeared through VC PER: HON’BLE JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL, PRESIDENT

JUDGMENT

1. The Appellant has preferred the present appeal challenging the order dated

01.11.2023 passed by the District Commission wherein the right of the Appellant to file the Written Statement was closed, and it was held as under :

“01.11.2023 Present: Gaurav Chadha for complainant Renu for OP As per record notice send to OP on 21.03.2023 and delivered on 22.08.2023 and on 25.03.2023 at both addresses. Parcel weighting 70 gm. OP also admitted that complete paper book was sent to OP. 45 days to file reply has expired therefore Defence of OP is stuck off. Complainant is directed to file evidence on

22.02.2024.”

2. Aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment of District Commission, the Appellant has preferred the present appeal on the following grounds:

A. Because the impugned order has been passed by the Ld. District Forum by ignoring relevant facts and materials on record and without calling for the relevant records from the appellant which has rendered the impugned order erroneous, arbitrary and unsustainable. The impugned order has been passed without proper application of mind B. Because the order passed by Ld. District Forum while passing the impugned order / relied upon the evidence and the averments of the pleadings of the respondent herein, and ignored the averments and evidence placed on record by the appellant, C. Because the Ld. District Forum while passing the impugned order/judgment/award totally relied upon the averments of the pleadings of the respondent and ignored the averments and evidence placed on record by the appellant;

D. Because the Ld. District Forum while passing the impugned order / judgment / award ignored the settled law and the judgments passed by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court and Hon'ble Supreme Court of India;

E. Because the order / judgment passed by the Ld. District Forum lacks application of judicious mind and appreciation of law applicable to the facts and circumstances of the case as well as the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India and Hon'ble High Court of Delhi, F. Because the Ld. District Forum while passing the impugned order/judgment/ award has committed grave error of law;

G. Because the impugned order / judgment is not tenable in the eyes of law and against the entire judicial pronouncement on the subject.

I. Because the order passed by Ld. District Forum is based on surmises and conjectures and is liable to be set aside only on this ground”

3. The Respondent has filed the reply to the present appeal and has stated therein that the Impugned Order is well reasoned and requires no intervention. Secondly, it is submitted that the present case is nothing but an abuse of the process of law to harass the Respondent. Pressing the aforesaid submission, the Resp