This revision application is directed against the order of Ld. DCDRF, Siliguri dated 28/06/2018 in reference to  CC no 1/S/2018.

This revisional case in short is that the OP/complainant filed a consumer complaint against the revisionists for praying compensation on account of medical negligence and deficiency of service on the part of the revisionists.

The consumer complaint was admitted on merit  and the revisionists was served notice with direction to  appear before the Ld. Forum and to  contest the consumer complainant by submitting the written version.

The revisionists/ OP could not appear before the forum and also has failed to  submit W.V. within the statutory period of 45 days. So the case was placed for ex-parte hearing against the revisionists.

Being aggrieved with said order this revision follows on the grounds that the Ld. Forum has failed to give the opportunity to the revisionists sufficiently. So that, they could not contest the case.

The further case of the revisionist is that on 28/06/2018. The Ld. Advocate of the revisionist was ready with W.V. to submit the same before the Ld. Forum. But on his way towards the office of the forum he met with a road accident and got severe injury and could reach to the forum on late hours of office of the Ld. Forum. Unfortunately on the very date the Ld. Forum already placed the case for ex-parte hearing which was unfair and unwanted.

The revisional application was admitted on its merit. The notice was sent to the address of OP/Complainant who did not contest the revisional application.

So the revisional application was moved before this commission by the revisionist on its merit.

Decision with reasons  

Having heard the Ld. Advocate of the revisionist it appears to this commission that Ld.  Advocate of the revisionist was entrusted by the revisionists who were the opposite parties to the complaint case to conduct their case before the Ld. Forum. Ld. Advocate then prepared the W.V. in due time and obtained the signatures of the revisionists including their affidavits and started to proceed towards. The office of the Ld. Forum at Mallaguri, Siliguri. But on the way with his motor bike, he met with an accident and received severe injuries in his persons. After an immediate treatment, he could arrive to the office of the Ld. Forum to submit the W.V. But by that time on that very date on 28/06/2018 Ld. Forum had already settled the case for ex-parte hearing. So the revisionists/OP could not avail  the opportunity to  contest the case.                                                                                                                               

Ld. Advocate further submits that proceedings of the said case is now still pending and there is opportunity to allow the revisionists to contest the case.

After considering all aspects, the commission thinks it fit that for the interest of Justice, a consumer dispute should be adjudicated by giving every parties to the dispute to move their own cases. Now the case is still pending and if the opposite parties to that case can get a chance to contest the case, then the process of adjudication shall be complete and fair.

Thus, the revisional application should be allowed subject to make payment of sufficient cost.

Hence, Ordered,

That the instant revisional application is hereby allowed on merit subject to payment of cost of Rs. 5000/- to be paid by the revisionist to the consumer complainant Anup Kumar Sarkar on 30/09/2019 before the Ld. Forum. The order of Ld. DCDRF Siliguri dated on 28/06/2018 in CC No. 1/S/18                                         

Is hereby set aside subject to  payment of cost as imposed upon the revisionists/ops as condition precedent to file the W.V. on that very date i.e. on 30/09/2019. Let a copy of this order supplied to the parties free of cost.

The interim order of stay stands withdrawn.

Let the order be communicated to the Ld. DCDRF Siliguri by e-mail.