West Bengal

StateCommission

FA/1061/2013

The Indian Institute of Planning & Management - Complainant(s)

Versus

Sandip Naskar - Opp.Party(s)

Mr. Abhik Das Mrs. Koyeli Mukhopadhyay

14 Dec 2021

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
WEST BENGAL
11A, Mirza Ghalib Street, Kolkata - 700087
 
First Appeal No. FA/1061/2013
( Date of Filing : 26 Sep 2013 )
(Arisen out of Order Dated 26/07/2013 in Case No. Complaint Case No. CC/179/2013 of District North 24 Parganas)
 
1. The Indian Institute of Planning & Management
I.I.P.M. Tower, AQ-6, Sec-V, Salt Lake City, near Technopolis, Kolkata - 700 091.
2. The Indian School of Business & Economy (I.S. B.E)
I.I.P.M. Tower, AQ-6, Sec-V, Salt Lake City, near Technopolis, Kolkata - 700 091.
...........Appellant(s)
Versus
1. Sandip Naskar
S/o Shyamal Naskar, Sonarpur(Noapara)(Dighipar), P.O. & P.S. - Sonarpur, Dist. South 24 Pgs., Kolkata - 700 150.
...........Respondent(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. SHYAMAL GUPTA PRESIDING MEMBER
 
PRESENT:Mr. Abhik Das Mrs. Koyeli Mukhopadhyay, Advocate for the Appellant 1
 
Dated : 14 Dec 2021
Final Order / Judgement

Sri Shyamal Gupta, Member

This Appeal is directed against the order dated 26.07.2013 of the Ld. DCDRC, North 24 Parganas passed in CC/179/2013 by the OP/Appellant.

The fact of the Complaint is that Complainant alleged certain deficiency on the part of Appellants with regard to certain three years full time under graduate programme. On hearing the Complainant, Ld. DCDRC passed the ex parte order allowing Complaint petition.

Being aggrieved with the said order dated 26.07.2013 OP/Appellant filed the instant Appeal. Ld. Advocate of the Appellant submits that the Appellant herein had not received the copy of the notice and as such could not contest the Complaint Case. As the notice was never received by the Appellant the entire matter went unrepresented and only after receiving the copy of the Execution case, that it came to know about the filing of the complaint which is absolutely baseless and devoid of any material substances.

Peculiar enough, Complainant/Respondent did not turn up here.

Considering the entire panorama and without delving into the matter on merit the case is remanded back to Ld. DCDRC so that OP can get the opportunity to adduce W.V and evidence on their behalf.

Hence,

Ordered

That the Appeal be and same is allowed in part. Ld. DCDRC is advised to rehear the matter afresh after giving opportunity to OP/Appellant to adduce W.V and evidence.

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. SHYAMAL GUPTA]
PRESIDING MEMBER
 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.