Date of filing: 28.03.2019 Date of disposal: 02.07.2019
Complainant: Mrs. Jharna Nath Majumder, W/o. Mr. Benulal Nath Majumder, residing at Village & PO: Samudragarh, P.S. Nadanghat, District: Burdwan (Presently Purba Bardhaman), West Bengal, Pin – 713 519.
Opposite Party: 1. The Branch Manager, PNB Metlife India Insurance Co. Ltd., (Formerly known as Metlife India Insurance CO. Ltd.), 4/B/1 Salkia School Road, 2nd Floor, BL-I, Howrah – 711 106 (W.B.)
2. The Managing Director, Metlife India Insurance Co. Ltd., (Formerly known as Metlife India Insurance CO. Ltd.), No. 5, Brigade Seshmahal, Vani Vilas Road, Basavanagudi, Bangalore – 560 004.
3. Srabanti Majumder, Sales Manager, Agency Sales, Metlife India Insurance Co. Ltd., (Formerly known as Metlife India Insurance CO. Ltd.), 4/B/1 Salkia School Road, 2nd Floor, BL-I, Howrah – 711 106 (W.B.),
4. Mr. Monish Sinha, Senior Sales Manager, Metlife India Insurance Co. Ltd., 4/B/1 Salkia School Road, 2nd Floor, BL-I, Howrah – 711 106 (W.B.)
5. The Branch Manager, Axis Bank, Saptagram Kalna Katwa Road, Near New Bus Terminus, Ambika Kalna, PO. & PS: Kalna, District: Burdwan (presently Purba Bardhaman), Pin- 713 409 (W.B.).
Present: Hon’ble President: Smt. Jayanti Moitra (Ray).
Hon’ble Member: Ms. Nivedita Ghosh.
Appeared for the Complainant: Ld. Advocate, Chandrani Dey.
Appeared for the Opposite Party No. 1&2: Ld. Advocate, Debdas Rudra.
Appeared for the Opposite Party No. 5 : Ld. Advocate, Dipankar Ray.
Order No. 20, Dated: 02.07.2019
This order is arising out of the Misc. Application being No. 33/2019 filed by the complainant in connection with Consumer Complaint being No. 189/2017 with a prayer to pass an order so that the complainant may publish the matter of the instant case in the form of notice in a widely circulated daily newspaper for service of the same upon the OP No. 3.
It is stated by the complainant in the application that though the services of summons upon the other Opposite Parties have properly been served, but due to non-service of the same upon the OP-3, the instant complaint case is still pending for non-service of proper notice. The complainant now highly apprehends that the OP-3 only to avoid the present case against her, somehow in collusion with the postal peon is hampering proper service upon her. So it is now necessary for t his complainant to serve notice upon the OP-3 under some substituted way and i.e. by publication of the concerned matter in a widely circulated daily newspaper, otherwise, the complainant will be seriously prejudiced. Prayer is made for allowing this application so that the complainant wants to make services upon the OP No. 3 by way of advertisement in a daily newspaper.
It is evident from the record that the notice upon the Op-3 returned unserved two times with postal remark “item delivery attempted Returned – Addressee Left” & “left without address hence return to sender”. Op Nos. 1&2 and OP No. 5 appeared through Ld. Advocate and filed written version to contest the case. The case is running ex parte against the OP No. 4 as the OP- 4 though received the notice but did not appear to contest the case by filing written version within the stipulated period.
We are of the opinion that for proper adjudication of this complaint, service of summon upon OP No. 3 is very necessary. Therefore, the prayer of the complainant should be allowed.
Hence, it is
O r d e r e d
that the Misc. Application being No. 33/2019 be and the same is allowed in favour of the complainant.
Let plain copies of this order be supplied to the parties free of cost as per provisions lf law.
Dictated & Corrected by me (Jayanti Maitra (Ray)
President
(Nivedita Ghosh) DCDRF, Burdwan
Member
DCDRF, Burdwan
(Nivedita Ghosh)
Member
DCDRF, Burdwan
