DIST. CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESAL FORUM
NORTH 24 Pgs BARASAT.
M.A No. 239/2017
Arising out of C. C. No. 306/2017
Date of Filing: Date of Disposal:
18.09.2017 25.01.2018
PETITIONER = Vs. = O.Ps.
Sri Prasanta Kr. Saha, 1. Sri Biv Ash Gupta,
S/o. Late Ruhidas Saha, S/o. Late Baidyanath Gupta,
183, Sahid Ganesh Dutta Road, AB-22, Deshbandhu Nagar,
P.O.Birati, P.S. Nimta, P.S. Baguiati, P.O. Deshbandhunagar
Kolkata-700051, Kolkata- 700059.
Dist- North 24 Pgs. 2. Sri Mahul Bandhu Neogi,
S/o. Late Muktesh Bandhu Neogi,
Flat B-105, Nilambar Bihar,
40, Dum Dum Road, P.S. Dum Dum,
Kolkata- 700074,
Both are partners of ‘Shiva Construction’
AB-22, Deshbandhu Nagar,
P.S. Baguiati, P.O. Deshbandhunagar
Kolkata- 700059.
P R E S E N T :-Siddhartha Ganguli…..……President
:- Smt.Silpi Majumder ……………….Member
Order No. 05
Dated. 25.01.2018
This order is arising out of the M.A being No. 239/2017 filed by the O.Ps in the C.C No. 306/2017 challenging the maintainability of the complaint.
At the time of taking the said M.A for hearing in presence of both parties
Contd/2
:: 2 ::
the Ld. Counsel for the complainant has submitted that he has not received the copy of the said M.A as yet, but the same has already been filed without servicing a copy and on 18.09.2017.
It is evident from the record that along with the said M.A one postal receipt is annexed issued by department of Post –India, but from the said document it is not evident that the complainant has received the copy of the M.A prior to filing of this application before he office of this Ld. Forum. The Ld. Counsel for the complainant has raised vehement objection against such mode of filing keeping the complainant in dark and according to him, such action and attitude of the O.Ps cannot be permitted under law. Accordingly, prayer is made by the complainant for dismissal of the said application.
The O.Ps have submitted that they have sent the item through post but the delivery of track report is not available at present. According to the O.Ps, the complainant has received the copy of the application.
Upon hearing from the parties, we are of the view that the O.Ps did not comply with the Section 10(6) of the Consumer Protection Regulations, 2005 wherein it is enumerated that ‘after the opposite party or respondent has put in appearance, no application or document shall be received by the Registrar unless it bears and endorsement that a copy thereof has been served upon the other side.
In the instant application there is no endorsement on the application showing that the other side has received the copy of the application prior to filing of the same. As in the instant application the O.Ps have failed to comply with the said section of the Regulations, hence the M.A filed by the O.Ps cannot be sustained due to procedural defect in filing the same.
Hence,
It is ordered,
that the M.A. being No. 239/2017 is hereby dismissed without being heard.
The O.Ps are at liberty to file application, if necessary in this Forum.
Member Member
Dictated and corrected by me.
