West Bengal

Dakshin Dinajpur

CC/10/40

Sri Anup Kumar Mondal - Complainant(s)

Versus

1.The D.E & Divisional Manager - Opp.Party(s)

Ld.Adv

22 Feb 2011

ORDER

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum

Dakshin Dinajpur, W. Bengal

(Old Sub-Jail Municipal Market Complex, 2^nd Floor, Balurghat Dakshin Dinajpur Pin - 733101)

Telefax: (03522)-270013

Present

Sri B. Niyogi - President

Sri S. K. Ghosh - Member

Miss. Swapna Saha - Member

Consumer Complaint No. 40/2010

Sri Anup Kumar Mondal,

S/o Lt. Dwijendra Nath Mondal,

Vill.: Chakbhabani, P.O. & P.S. -Balurghat,

Dist. Dakshin Dinajpur.……………………………Complainant

V-E-R-S-U-S

1. The D. E. & Divisional Manager,

Dakshin Dinajpur(D) Division,

West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd.,

P.O. & P.S. Balurghat, Dist- Dakshin Dinajpur.

2. The Assistant Manager( P & A)

Dakshin Dinajpur(D) Division,

West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd.,

P.O. & P.S. Balurghat, Dist- Dakshin Dinajpur.

3. The A. E. & Station Manager,

Balurghat Group Electric Supply,

West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd.,

P.O. & P.S. Balurghat, Dist- Dakshin Dinajpur … …Opposite Parties

For complainant ……- Sri Ld. Adv.

For OPs ……………- Sri Sudip Chatterjee, Ld. Adv.

Date of Filing : 28.09.2010

Date of Disposal : 22.02.2011

Order No.11

Dt. 22.02.2011

Complainant is absent. No steps appear to have been taken on his behalf. None appears for the complainant despite repeated calls. Heard the Ld. Counsel for the OPs who pressed for dismissal of the complaint.

Perused the case record.

It appears that the complainant remained absent without steps on 14.01.2011 which was a date fixed for final hearing of this case. On that date order was passed directing the complainant to show cause as to why the case should not be dismissed for default on his part. But the complainant does not appear to have shown cause in terms of that order. In fact the complainant does not appear to have taken any steps since that date 14.01.2011.

It is further seen that in the complaint the complainant virtually prayed for rectification of a electricity bill. The OPs in their written version dt. 7.12.10 appears to have presented the case that during the pendency of the case they got the grievances of the complainant’s redressed by having got the impugned bill rectified.

However, the complainant does not appear to have prayed for withdrawal of the complaint. Rather, he remained absent without having taken any steps on the date fixed for final hearing. Having kept in view the circumstances. we deem it proper to dismiss the complaint in terms of Sec 13 (2)(c) of the CP Act.

The date of completion of service of notice is not apparent from the case record. However, the OPs entered appearance in the case on 24.11.10 which was fixed for S/R and Appearance. Instant proceeding is thus getting disposed of well and within a period of four months from the appearance from the OPs in the case.

Under such circumstances, it is.

O R D E R E D

That the instant CC case brought by the complainant Sri Anup Kumar Mondal on 28.9.2010 be dismissed in terms of Rule 13(2)(c) of the CP Act.

There will, however, be no order as to costs.

Let plain copies of this order be furnished to the parties free of cost.

Dictated & corrected

(B. Niyogi)

President

I concur

(S.K. Ghosh)

Member

-x-

O R D E R E D

That the instant CC case brought by the complainant Sri Anup Kumar Mondal on 28.9.2010 be dismissed in terms of Rule 13(2)(c) of the CP Act.

There will, however, be no order as to costs.

Let plain copies of this order be furnished to the parties free of cost.

Dictated & corrected

……Sd/-….……. …..Sd/-.…….

(B. Niyogi) (B. Niyogi)

President President

I concur

…….Sd/-……

(S.K. Ghosh)

Member

1. Date when free copy was issued ……………………………..

2. Date of application for certified copy ……………………………..

3. Date when copy was made ready …………………………….

4. Date of delivery ……………………………..

FREE COPY [Reg. 18(6)]

1. Mode of dispatch ……………………………..

2. Date of dispatch ……………………………..

-x-