Assam

StateCommission

A/32/2017

Sri Rana Pratap Bordoloi, Managing Director, Fortune Towers Pvt. Ltd. - Complainant(s)

Versus

Dilip Kr. Bhattacharya - Opp.Party(s)

Mr. R. Goswami

19 Nov 2019

ORDER

BEFORE THE ASSAM STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
GUWAHATI
 
First Appeal No. A/32/2017
( Date of Filing : 17 Jun 2017 )
(Arisen out of Order Dated 18/05/2017 in Case No. CC/62/2016 of District Kamrup)
 
1. Sri Rana Pratap Bordoloi, Managing Director, Fortune Towers Pvt. Ltd.
Ma Maheswari (behind hotel Viswaratna) Tokabari Satra, A. T. Road, Guwahati-781001
Kamrup(M)
Assam
...........Appellant(s)
Versus
1. Dilip Kr. Bhattacharya
S/o Late Gobinda Chandra Bhattarcharya R/o-Patarkuchi, P.O., P. S.-Basistha
Kamrup(M)
Assam
...........Respondent(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE Dr. Indira Shah PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MR. Dilip Kr. Mahanta MEMBER
 
PRESENT:Mr. R. Goswami, Advocate for the Appellant 1
 
Dated : 19 Nov 2019
Final Order / Judgement

 

               This appeal is directed against the order dated 18-05-2017 passed by the District Forum, Kamrup, whereby the Consumer Case No. 62/2016 filed by the respondent against the appellant, has been ordered to be proceeded with ex-parte.

               Heard Mr. R.Goswami, learned counsel, appearing for the appellant. None has appeared for the respondent.

               The respondent herein filed two Consumer Case being No. 62/2016 along with 61/2016 against the appellant. In both the cases, the prayer and relief are identical. The respondent took steps in both the cases while the appellant appeared in Consumer Case No. 61/2016 only. There was no representation on behalf of the appellant in Consumer Case No. 62/2016. Therefore, the District Forum passed the impugned order dated 18-05-2017 to proceed with the case ex-parte.

               It is submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the appellant that there was a bonafide mistake on the part of the appellant. The appellant received notice in Consumer Case No. 62/2016 and simentiniously notice in respect of Consumer Case No. 61/2016 was also received by an ex-employee of the appellant. The ex-employee kept the second notice thinking that this notice is in respect of the same Consumer Case as the same parties in both the Consumer Cases were same and he thought that the respondent has by mistake sent the same notice with a complaint petition twice. The appellant was under misconception that the respondent has filed only one case until the advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent informed the appellant’s advocate about the pendency of another case.

               In view of the circumstances, we are of the opinion that the appellant should be allowed to contest the case filed by the respondent before the District Forum. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 18-05-2017 is set-aside 

                Both parties are directed to appear before the concerned District Forum on 28-01-2020. The appellant will file his written version on that day.

               The appeal is allowed and disposed of accordingly.

               Send back the original record along with a copy of this order to the concerned District Forum.

 

 
 
[HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE Dr. Indira Shah]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Dilip Kr. Mahanta]
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.