West Bengal

StateCommission

RP/8/2020

Superintendent, Kalyani ESI Hospital - Complainant(s)

Versus

Anirban Bhowmik - Opp.Party(s)

Mr. Puspasish Gupta

17 Feb 2020

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
WEST BENGAL
11A, Mirza Ghalib Street, Kolkata - 700087
 
Revision Petition No. RP/8/2020
( Date of Filing : 13 Feb 2020 )
(Arisen out of Order Dated 12/12/2019 in Case No. Complaint Case No. CC/96/2019 of District Nadia)
 
1. Superintendent, Kalyani ESI Hospital
A Block, P.O. & P.S. - Kalyani, Dist - Nadia, Pin - 741 235.
...........Appellant(s)
Versus
1. Anirban Bhowmik
S/O - Akhil Kr. Bhowmik, Vill - Pumila, P.O. & P.S. - Chakdaha, Dist - Nadia, Pin - 741 222.
...........Respondent(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ISHAN CHANDRA DAS PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MRS. SAMIKSHA BHATTACHARYA MEMBER
 HON'BLE MR. SHYAMAL KUMAR GHOSH MEMBER
 
For the Petitioner:Mr. Puspasish Gupta, Advocate
For the Respondent:
None appears
 
Dated : 17 Feb 2020
Final Order / Judgement

HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ISHAN CHANDRA DAS,PRESIDENT

          This Revisional Application has been filed questioning propriety of the Order No.6 dated 12.12.2019 passed by ld.D.C.D.R.F. Krishnagar at Nadia ,  where ld.Forum concerned allowed the prayer of the OP for filing evidence, and the  date 17.12.2020 (i.e. today) has been fixed for filing evidence from  the side of the OP. Being aggrieved by such order dated 12.12.2019 the OP preferred this Revisional Application.

          Heard ld.Counsel for the Revisionist . At the time of admission of this Revisional Application, it is pointed out that the Complaint Case being CC/96/2019 pending before ld.D.C.D.R.F. was admitted on 6.6.2019 and the next date (17/7/2019) was fixed for SR and appearance . On 17/7/2019 the OP appeared and filed Written Version and the Forum concerned fixed 19/9/2019 for argument. The Order no.5 dated 19/9/2019 i.e. the date fixed for argument was adjourned till 12/12/2019 on  which date the impugned order was passed. What surprises us is that after the filing of the Written version by the OP , the complainant should have been  allowed to file his evidence and the OP should have been  given liberty to cross examine the complainant by filing questionnaire and the reply should be given by the complainant thereafter. Similarly, the OP should be given equal opportunities  to file evidence/cross examination and reply by the Complainant etc. But the Forum concerned by overlapping all the procedures fixed the date of argument and thereafter allowed the OP to file evidence without giving any scope to file evidence by the complainant.

          Hence, we admit the Revisional Application , the same being a meritorious one and set aside the order impugned and its  previous order , fixing the date of argument and direct the ld.D.C.D.R.F. to follow the procedure provided by Sec. 13 of  the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

      With the above observations and directions, this Revisional Application stands disposed of. The Revisionist is directed to appear before the ld.D.C.D.R.F. on 27.2.2020 and ld. D.C.D.R.F. to follow the direction as indicated hereinabove.

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ISHAN CHANDRA DAS]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[HON'BLE MRS. SAMIKSHA BHATTACHARYA]
MEMBER
 
 
[HON'BLE MR. SHYAMAL KUMAR GHOSH]
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.