Case: Shri Kuljit Singh Vs District Consumer Dispute Redressal Forum (DCDRF). Central Information Commission

Party Name:Shri Kuljit Singh Vs District Consumer Dispute Redressal Forum (DCDRF)
Judges:Wajahat Habibullah, C.I.C.
Issue:Right to Information Act
Judgement Date:March 21, 2007
Court:Central Information Commission


Wajahat Habibullah, C.I.C.


1. In an application to the SPIO, District Consumer Redressal Forum dated 5-11-2005, applicant Shri Kuljit Singh sought the following information from the District Consumer Redressal Forum, Sheikh Sarai, New Delhi on a specified group housing society:

i) Although copy of reply to the affidavit containing damaging information on the willful violation of provision of DCS Act by the Society were received by the OP and he did not attend this Forum since then why the benefit of doubt has been given to the OP ignoring all evidence in this reply and written arguments.

ii) Reason for making exception of rules and in gross violations of the provision of Consumer Act by demanding concrete evidence from us may please be supplied.

D) Request for supply of photocopies and typed transcript of manuscript:

1. Kindly supply photocopies of the steno's shorthand book recording dictation of Shri Khanna Hon'ble President on the actual date of receipt of reply to affidavit (probably 6-10-2004) and the next date of hearing when delivery of judgment was originally fixed. Also kindly supply photocopies of dictation of Sr. Member for all the hearings presided by her.

2. Kindly supply typed transcript of all this shorthand. If any part of dictation has been scored out, typed transcript of the same may also be supplied. If any part of dictation has been made illegible, circumstances under which this was done with report of the concerned steno may also be supply.

3. Kindly supply photocopy of the entire note sheet attached with this case file including all notings and actual signatures made in hand.

E) The judgment of the case:

1. Kindly inform the circumstances under which judgment could not be delivered on the pronounced date in the hearing next to 6-10-2004.

2. I have attended almost all the hearings of complaint No. 87/2004 and 295/2004 both filed by my son. During this period of over six months, I have witnessed several judgments being delivered by the President (Hon'ble Shri Khanna) and the previous Sr. Lady member. In all these judgments, the cases were argued out by the contending parties before the Presiding Judge or Member in a transparent way, thus providing a level ground to the Judge and the two contending parties. I do not mean that both the contending parties were happy with the judgment. I only mean that contending parties knew the grounds of judgment but simultaneously the losing party...

To continue reading