West Bengal

Howrah

RA/1/2022

Mr. Ravi Bhat, The Executive, Godrej and Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd., - Complainant(s)

Versus

CHANDAN JANA, - Opp.Party(s)

08 Aug 2022

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION HOWRAH
20, Round Tank Lane, Howrah 711 101.
Office (033) 2638 0892, 0512 Confonet (033) 2638 0512 Fax (033) 2638 0892
 
Review Application No. RA/1/2022
( Date of Filing : 08 Aug 2022 )
In
Complaint Case No. CC/51/2022
 
1. Mr. Ravi Bhat, The Executive, Godrej and Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd.,
S/O Dr. Manik Chandra Jana, of 173, netaji Subhas Road, Howrah 711 101
...........Appellant(s)
Versus
1. CHANDAN JANA,
Pirojshanagar Vikhroli, Mumbai400 079
...........Respondent(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. Sankar Kumar Ghosh PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MRS. Smt. Babita Chaudhuri MEMBER
 
PRESENT:
 
Dated : 08 Aug 2022
Final Order / Judgement

ORDER NO.1                                                                                   DATE- 08.08.2022

                Record is put up by the put up petition of OP.1.  OP.1 files an application along with Vokalatnama praying for vacating the ex-parte hearing order dated 07.7.2022 of this Commission in the form of Review.

                Said application of the OP.1 is taken up for hearing.  Heard the Ld. Advocate of the OP.1 in respect of prayer for Review.  The ground mainly highlighted in the said petition is that notice was not served the weight given and the track report would prove that. 

                Regard being had upon such submissions of Ld. Counsel appearing for the OP.1 and going through the application for Review, it may be noted that non-mentioning of weight in track report issued by the postal authority certainly cannot be a ground for Review because from track report we are ascertaining the service of notice and not weight.  Moreover, section 40 of C.P.Act, 2019 speaks clearly that DC shall have power to review any of the order passed by it if there is an error apparent on the face of the record.  Obviously, the pointed highlighted by the Ld Counsel is not an error relating to service of notice in respect of track report i.c.w. OP.1.

                The two other points highlighted in that petition appear to be formal in nature because it is the point highlighted on behalf of the OP.1 by itself is not an error apparent on the face of record. 

                In the above backdrop this Commission is constrained to hold that the prayer for review of OP.1 appears to be sans any substance and said application for Review is liable to be rejected.  Accordingly, we do that.

           D/C

 

(Sankar Kumar Ghosh)                     (Babita Chaudhuri)                               (Sankar Kumar Ghosh)

        President                                                    Member                                                 President

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Sankar Kumar Ghosh]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[HON'BLE MRS. Smt. Babita Chaudhuri]
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.