Order no. 4 dated 20.09.2018: -

Today is fixed for appearance of respondent the revisionist and hearing the revision petition on merit. The revisionist is present today through the Ld. Advocate. None appears on behalf of the opposite party. It appears that the instant revision was registered in our commission against the order of Ld. D.C.D.R.F, Siliguri dated on 24.07.2018 and 27.07.2018. The revision petition was admitted on 28/08/2018 and the notice of the revision was served upon the opposite party of revision on 30/08/2018. The date was fixed on 13.09/2018 for S/R appearance of OP and hearing. On that day the revisionist furnished the track consignment of notice extracted from postal website. On that date also no steps was taken on the part of the OP. However, on that day the case was adjourned and the OP was given further opportunity for being heard on 20/09/2019 that is today. Today also no steps  taken on behalf of the opposite party. So, the revision petition is heard on merit in presence of the Ld. Advocate of the revisionist. The jist of the case is that the opposite party Annapurna Vyapaar Pvt. Ltd. filed the instant consumer complaint bearing no. 63/S/2016 and the Bank of Baroda as OP of that case after receiving the notice appeared before the Ld. Forum and furnished the W.V. Thereafter, the opposite party filed an amendment petition for amending the written version as per provision of order (vi) rule 17 of CPC. Ld. District Forum, Siliguri was pleased to allow the amendment petition of that case and the OP/revisionist was asked to filing the amended written version on 24/07/2018.

                On 24/07/2018 the revisionist/OP could not file amended written version before the Ld. Forum and as a result the Ld. Forum then vide order no. 16 of 24/07/2018 passed the order to the effect “Hence the order no. 14 dated 18/06/2018 not being implemented by OP Bank. Order no.  16 dated 25.07.2018 speaks that the Ld. Forum received the W.V from the OP by speed post which was kept with the record. Thereafter on 27/07/2018 the revisionist/OP by a put up petition submitted a prayer for recalling of the order of Ld. Forum dated 24.07.2018. Ld. Forum vide order no.17 dated    27/07/2018 has rejected the recall application as the forum had no scope to recall of its own order. Being aggrieved with the order this revisional application follows on the ground that Ld. Forum had passed the order on 24/07/2018 which was erroneous, defective and against the spirit of fair justice.

Decision with reasons

Admitted position is that the Ld. Forum has accepted the amendment prayer of the revisionist/op and allowed the revisionist to amend his pleading that is the written version. The revisionist/OP was allowed to file the amended written version on 24/07/2018. Ld. Forum on that day passed the impugned order that the order of allowing the amendment of written version could not be implemented. The revisionist/ OP has thought that by virtue of this order the Ld. Forum has completely debarred the revisionist/OP from tendering the evidences in view of the amended written version. And for that reason, the revisionist/OP has sought for the recall of the order dated 24/07/2018. On the other hand, if we go through the order of Ld. Forum dated vide order no. 16 dated 25/07/2018, We find that the Ld. Forum has accepted the amended written version of the revisionist/OP and placed the matter for settling the dispute on hearing the argument on 05/10/2018. Therefore, the revisionist/OP has no cause to become worry about the amended written version filed by him before the Ld. Forum. On the other hand, Ld. Forum had allowed the amendment of the written version of the revisionist/OP. He should get an opportunity to rely upon his case on the basis of the amended written version already filed by him before the Ld. Forum. So, in my view this revisional application is not a redundant one. Further, for the ends of justice and to protect his interest for application of fair justice before the forum his revisional application should be allowed on merit.

Hence, it is

O R D E R E D: -

That the revisional application filed by the Bank of Baroda that is revisionist is hereby allowed on merit. The order of Ld. Forum bearing no. 14 dated 24/07/2018 and order no. 17 dated 27/07/2018 is hereby recalled and Ld. D.C.D.R.F, Siliguri is hereby requested to hear the argument of the case already fixed on merit on 05/10/2018 after accepting the amended written version already filed by the OP/revisionist before the Ld. Forum.

Let a copy of this order be communicated to the Ld. D.C.D.R.F, Siliguri by e-mail as well as by a special messenger.