PLJ 2023 Lahore (Note) 126
[Multan Bench, Multan]
Present: Abid Hussain Chattha, J.
Syed ALI RAZA NAQVI--Appellant
versus
GHULAM ABBAS--Respondent
F.A.O. No. 58 of 2022, heard on 5.10.2022.
Punjab Consumer Protection Act, 2005 (II of 2005)--
----Ss. 25 & 30(5)--Ex-parte decision--Claiming an amount--Concealment of fact--Ex-parte proceedings were initiated against Appellant on 16.03.2022 and on next date of hearing i.e. 29.03.2022, ex-parte decision was made by Consumer Court--The complaint was instituted on 18.09.2019 and was eventually decided on 29.03.2022, whereas, Section 30(5) of Act requires Consumer Court to decide cases within six months after service of summons--Fact of filing an application for setting aside ex-parte orders before Consumer Court was also concealed, although this Appeal was filed whereas, application for setting aside ex-parte orders before Consumer Court was filed on 14.04.2022--The said application was also dismissed for non-prosecution on 28.06.2022 which clearly demonstrates conduct of Appellant to effect that he and his counsel remained absent without any just cause from proceedings before Consumer Court thereafter, on 28.06.2022, when application for setting aside ex-parte orders was dismissed for non-prosecution--The ex-parte decision was rendered by Consumer Court based on evidence tendered by Respondent--No ground was taken in Memo of Appeal or urged at time of arguments on merits regarding impugned decision of Consumer Court. [Para 5] A
Malik Ansar Abbass Dharala, Advocate for Appellant.
Ch. Daoud Ahmad Wains, Advocate for Respondent.
Date of hearing: 5.10.2022.
Judgment
This First Appeal is directed against the impugned Orders dated 16.03.2022 & 29.03.2022 passed by the Presiding Officer, District Consumer Court, Multan.
2. The brief facts leading to this Appeal are that the Respondent filed a complaint under Section 25 of the Punjab Consumer Protection Act, 2005 (the “Act”) against the Appellant on. 18.09.2019 claiming therein an amount of Rs. 10,040,000/-from the Appellant. The Appellant submitted contesting written reply thereto and after failure of settlement between the parties, the Consumer Court directed the parties to produce their respective evidence. The Respondent produced his entire evidence before the Consumer Court. On 16.03.2022, the case was fixed for evidence of the Appellant, however, no one appeared on his behalf, accordingly, ex-parte proceedings were initiated against him and case was adjourned to 29.03.2022 for ex-parte arguments. Even on the said date, neither the Appellant nor his learned counsel appeared before the Consumer Court. Accordingly, the Consumer Court on the said date accepted the complaint of the Respondent and directed the Appellant to pay Rs. 2,186,000/-to the Respondent within 30 days. Hence, this Appeal.
3. Learned counsel for the Appellant submitted that the impugned Orders have been passed against the law and facts of the case in arbitrary manner and in undue haste. Reasonable opportunity was not granted to the Appellant for recording evidence and the procedure envisaged in the Act was not duly adopted. Hence, the decision of the Consumer Court is not sustainable in the eyes of law. Therefore, he prayed that this Appeal be accepted and matter be remanded to the Consumer Court for decision afresh on merits in accordance with law after recording of evidence of the Appellant. No ground was taken in the memo. of Appeal regarding the merits of the decision rendered by the Consumer Court based on the evidence produced by the Respondent.
4. Learned counsel for the Respondent argued that ex-parte proceedings were rightly initiated by the Consumer Court on 16.03.2022 and the impugned Order dated 29.03.2022 was lawfully passed which though is an ex-parte order yet it is based on appreciation of available evidence and record. It was further stated that the Appellant also filed an application for setting aside ex-parte proceedings dated 16.03.2022 and ex-parte Order dated 29.03.2022 before the Presiding Officer on 14.04.2022 which was eventually fixed for arguments on 28.06.2022 after filing of reply by the Respondent but again neither the Appellant nor his counsel appeared before the Consumer Court and as such, the said application was dismissed due to non-prosecution. This fact was also concealed from this Court and placed certified copy of the said proceedings before this Court which was taken on record.
5. Record depicts that ex-parte proceedings were initiated against the Appellant on 16.03.2022 and on the next date of hearing i.e. 29.03.2022, the ex-parte decision was made by the Consumer Court. The complaint was instituted on 18.09.2019 and was eventually decided on 29.03.2022, whereas, Section 30(5) of the Act requires the Consumer Court to decide the cases within six months after service of summons. Moreover, the fact of filing an application for setting aside ex-parte orders before the Consumer Court was also concealed, although this Appeal was filed on 16.04.2022, whereas, the application for setting aside the ex-parte orders before the Consumer Court was filed on 14.04.2022. The said application was also dismissed for non-prosecution on 28.06.2022 which clearly demonstrates the conduct of the Appellant to the effect that he and his counsel remained absent without any just cause from the proceedings before the Consumer Court on 16.03.2022, 29.03.2022 and thereafter, on 28.06.2022, when the application for setting aside ex-parte orders was dismissed for non-prosecution. The ex-parte decision was rendered by the Consumer Court based on the evidence tendered by the Respondent. No ground was taken in the Memo of Appeal or urged at the time of arguments on merits regarding the impugned decision of the Consumer Court dated 29.03.2022.
6. Hence, this Appeal is devoid of any merit and is dismissed accordingly.
(A.A.K.) Appeal dismissed
0 Comments