DR. B. C. GUPTA, PRESIDING MEMBER 1. The challenge in this First Appeal No.49 of 2018 is to the order dated 04-01-2018 passed by the West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (hereinafter referred to as “the State Commission”) which states as follows: “Order No.20 Both the parties are present through their Ld. Advocates. The record is taken up for hearing the application being IA/307/2017 filed by the OP and also the application being IA/381/2017 and MA/164/2017 filed by the complainant. Ld. Advocate for the OP prays for time to file written objection against the applications being MA/164/2017 and IA/381/2017. As the complaint is pending for more than long 4 years and the OP has received the applications of IA/381/2017 on 22-12-2017 and 28-12-2017 and in respect of MA/164/2017 much earlier, the prayer for time to file W.O. cannot be entertained. Heard the Ld. Advocates appearing for the parties. To 16-01-2018 for order in respect of IA/307/2017, IA/381/2017 and also MA/164/2017.” 2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant in detail. 3. The learned counsel argued that IA/381/2017 has been filed before the State Commission by the respondent/complainant seeking action against the opposite parties under Section 340(1) Cr.P.C., 1973. A copy of this application had been served on them in the last week of December, 2017 only. They wanted to file a detailed reply to the said application but the learned State Commission had listed the matter on 16-01-2018 for passing order on the application without affording them proper opportunity to file the reply or to argue their case. 4. The learned counsel further stated that on MA/164/2017 they did not want to file any reply. IA/307/2017 was an application made by them for certain amendments. 5. The learned counsel for the appellant further argued that although notice of complaint number, CC/99/2014, had been served upon them but along with the notice a copy of CC/98/2014 had been appended. The said complaint has already been disposed of. A direction should, therefore, be issued to the State Commission to file copies of correct complaint and then allow them to file reply to the same. 6. We have examined the papers on record. In view of the position explained before us, it shall be in the interest of justice if the State Commission is directed to allow the appellant to file proper reply to the interim applications filed before them and also to send them correct copy of the complaint and allow them to file reply to the same. We, therefore, order accordingly and also direct the State Commission to allow both the parties to lead their detailed arguments with regard to the applications filed and then to pass detailed speaking order considering all relevant points put forward before them. 7. Accordingly, the State Commission is restrained from passing any order on 16-01-2018 as stated in the impugned order dated 04-01-2018 and then proceed further as directed above and pass fresh order after the parties have filed their written version and after hearing the parties in detail. 8. The First Appeal No.49 of 2018 stands disposed of. | 
