Sri Subhra Sankar Bhatta, Judicial Member
Both the Ld. Counsels appearing for the respective parties to the Revision Petition are present.
Today is fixed for passing order upon the Revision Petition filed by the Revisionists/Petitioners.
Considered the submissions advanced by the respective Ld. Counsels for the respective parties to the Revision Petition on 1st August, 2023.
Perused the entire contention of the Revision Petition and the written objection thereto filed by the Respondent/Complainant on 9th January, 2020.
Seen the materials available on record including the impugned order passed by the Ld. District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Howrah in connection with Consumer Complaint case no. CC/365/2018 wherein and whereby Ld. D.C.D.R.C. was pleased to pass the following order:-
“Order No. 8 Dated 16.07.2019
Complainant files hazira. O.P. Nos. 1 to 3 file a petition praying for vacating the order of ex-parte hearing. Perused the said petition and the case record. Heard Ld. Lawyer. Considered.
Since this Forum is empowered to review/recall it`s own order so the prayer for vacating the order of ex-parte hearing is summarily rejected.
Today is fixed for ex-parte hearing. Complainant files B.N.A. Complainant also files a petition along with some documents praying for treating those documents as part and parcel of the main complaint. Let the said petition be registered as M.A. case fixing 16.08.2019 for hearing of the M.A. case.”
Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the impugned order dated 16.07.2019 of the Ld. District Commission the Opposite Party Nos. 1, 2 and 3 as Revisionists/Petitioners have preferred the present Revision Petition under Section 17 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the 1) Respondent No. 1/Complainant no. 1, Sri Sudipa Pan, 2) Respondent No. 2/Complainant No. 2, Primetal Technologist India Pvt. Ltd., 3) Respondent No. 3/OP No. 4 Shree Jain Hospital and Research Centre and 4) Respondent No. 4/OP No. 5 The Assistant Administrator, Shree Jain Hospital and Research Centre.
In the body of the Revision Petition the Revisionists/Petitioners have specifically contended that the impugned order of the Ld. District Commission is bad both in law and facts; that the Ld. District Commission erred in holding that the Ld. Forum below have no power to set aside or recall its own order; that the Ld. District Commission failed to appreciate that the Revisionists/Petitioners had filed written version on their behalf within the stipulated period and had been contesting the complaint case through their Ld. Counsel; that the Ld. District Commission also failed to appreciate that the Advocate for the OP Nos. 1 to 3 was suffering from physical illness and could not turn up on 28.02.2019 when the complaint case was fixed for evidence; that the Ld. Forum below totally erred in fixing the date for ex parte hearing against the Opposite Parties/Present Revisionists/Petitioners; that the Ld. District Commission acted with material irregularities. On all such grounds the Revisionists/Petitioners have prayed for allowing the present Revision Petition after setting aside the impugned order dated 16.07.2019 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Howrah.
During the course of hearing Ld. Counsel appearing for the Revisionists/Petitioners has vehemently urged that the present Revisionists/Petitioners being Opposite Party Nos. 1, 2 and 3 of the complaint case received summons and duly appeared before the Ld. Commission below on 02.01.2019 by filing vokalatnama and also prayed for adjournment for filing the written version. Thereafter, next date was fixed on 10.01.2019 for filing written version. On that particular date the Revisionists/Petitioners appeared before the Ld. Forum below and filed fresh vokalatnama along with written version. Subsequently, the Ld. Advocate for the Opposite Party nos. 1 to 3 came to know that the Ld. District Commission was pleased to pass ex parte hearing of the Complaint case and fixed the next date on 16.08.2019 for hearing of the Misc. Application. Ultimately, the Complaint Case was fixed on 28.02.2019 for filing evidence on affidavit by the Complainants. On 28.02.2019 the Ld. Advocate for OP Nos. 1 to 3 could not appear before the Commission due to his illness. Thereafter, the Complaint Case was fixed on 03.04.2019 for ex parte hearing. On 03.04.2019 the Ld. Counsel for OP Nos. 1 to 3 again fell ill due to infection and could not attend the Commission. It has been categorically contended that as per order of the Bar Council of West Bengal and Howrah Bar Association the Revisionists/Petitioners could not appear before the Ld. Commission below. Ultimately on 16.07.2019 the Revisionists/Petitioners appeared before the Ld. Commission on the very date of filing BNA. On 16.07.2019 Ld. Commission below was pleased to reject the prayer of the Opposite Parties for vacating the ex parte order with the observation that the Ld. Forum is not empowered to review/recall its own order and the petition for vacating the ex parte order was summarily rejected.
On the other hand Ld. Counsel appearing for the Respondents has drawn my attention to the preamble of the Consumer Protection Act and submitted that the said Act was enacted to provide better protection of the interest of the Consumers. It is absolutely for the benefit or protection of the Consumers. The Consumer Protection Act has been enacted to provide expeditious disposal of the Consumer Disputes. It has been alleged by the Respondents/Complainants that the Revisionists/Petitioners were all along aware of the orders passed by the Ld. District Commission in the said complaint case. It has been also submitted that the Revisionists/Petitioners have filed the present Revision Petition motivatedly in order to drag the complaint proceeding. It has been also alleged that despite receipt of notice the Revisionists/Petitioners did not appear in the said complaint case within the stipulated period and consequently the complaint case was fixed for ex parte hearing against the Revisionists/Petitioners. It has been further alleged that the Ld. District Commission was pleased to fix the date on 16.07.2019 for ex parte hearing and filing brief notes of argument. According to the Respondents/Complainants that the Ld. District Commission was pleased to pass the impugned order for expeditious disposal of the complaint case and the Ld. District Commission was absolutely justified to hold “since this Forum is not empowered to review/recall its order the prayer for vacating the order of ex parte hearing is summarily rejected”. Ld. Counsel for the Respondent/Complainant has prayed for outright dismissal of the Revision Petition with compensatory costs.
On meticulous perusal of the entire materials available on record and keeping in mind the submissions of both sides we are of the firm view that the present Revisionists/Petitioners should be given an opportunity to contest the complaint case on merit. Moreover, there is clear reflection in the order sheet dated 27.05.2019 about the Resolution adopted by the Local Bar Association. There are allegations and counter allegations of the parties against each other which cannot be and should not be adjudged in this Revision Petition. No denial is forthcoming on record that the Ld. Advocates of Howrah Bar Association were not participating in the judicial proceedings as per Resolution adopted by the Bar Council of West Bengal and Howrah Bar Association. Undoubtedly, the Revisionists/Petitioners are willing to contest the complaint case on merit and as such they should be awarded an opportunity to contest the complaint case.
By virtue of impugned order dated 16.07.2019 vide order no. 8 Ld. District Commission was pleased to reject the prayer of Opposite Party Nos. 1 to 3 summarily with the observation that since the Forum is not empowered to review/recall its own order. Such observation of the Ld. District Commission is just and proper. The Consumer Protection Act, 1986 does not empower the
District Commission to review or recall its own order.
Considering all the above aspects and keeping in mind the position of law and the principles of natural justice we are inclined to hold that the impugned order dated 16.07.2019 passed by the Ld. District Commission in complaint case no. CC/365/2018 should be set aside for the ends of justice and the Revisionists/Petitioners should be given an opportunity to contest the complaint case on merit in accordance with law.
Hence, the impugned order requires to be interfered with for just and effective adjudication of the complaint case.
Thus, the Revision Petition succeeds.
It is, therefore,
O R D E R E D
That the present Revision Petition being RP no. 75/2019 be and the same is allowed on contest subject to payment of cost of Rs. 10,000/- (C.P.) to be paid by the Revisionists/Petitioners to Respondent No. 1/Complainant no. 1.
The impugned order dated 16th July, 2019 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Howrah in connection with Consumer Complaint Case no. CC/365/2018 is hereby set aside.
That the Ld. DCDRC, Howrah is directed to proceed with the complaint case in accordance with law after accepting the written version which was filed on behalf of OP Nos. 1 to 3 on 10.01.2019 and vacating the ex parte order passed on 16th July, 2019 against OP Nos. 1 to 3.
Let a copy of this order be transmitted to the Ld. District Commission, Howrah forthwith for information and taking necessary action.
Interim order, if any, be vacated at once.
Thus the Revision Petition stands disposed of.
Note accordingly.
