Sri Subhra Sankar Bhatta, Presiding Member

The present Revision Petition is directed against the impugned order dated 30^th August, 2022 vide order no. 03 passed by the Ld. District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Kolkata Unit—I, North (in short the “District Commission”) in connection with Miscellaneous Application no. MA/106/2022 arising out of consumer complaint case no. CC/255/2021 whereby Ld. District Commission was pleased to reject the Miscellaneous Application with cost of Rs.5,000/- (five thousand) only.

Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the above order of the Ld. District Commission the Revisionist/Petitioner/Opposite Party has preferred the instant Revision Petition and sought for relief more particularly described in the prayer portion of the Revision Petition.

Goutam Roy, the Respondent as Complainant instituted the Consumer Complaint Case being complaint case no. CC/255/2021 against the Opposite Party (Revisionist/Petitioner herein) with the allegation of deficiency in service and unfair trade practices on the part of the Opposite Party 123 Home Paints Pvt. Ltd. In the said complaint proceeding the Opposite Party failed to present their written version despite receipt of the notice. Consequently, the complaint case was proceeded ex parte against the OP vide order dated 30^th May, 2022 (order no. 7) and the next date was fixed on 10.08.2022 for filing affidavit in chief, BNA and argument. On 10.08.2022 Complainant files Affidavit in chief with original documents and those were kept with the record. The next date was fixed on 17.08.2022 for filing BNA and argument. On the next date argument of the Complainant was heard in full and the next date was fixed on 31.08.2022 for passing ex parte judgment and order.

It reveals from the case record that on 29^th August, 2022 the Opposite Party as Petitioner filed one Miscellaneous Application being no. MA/106/2022 in the complaint proceeding and prayed for recalling the order dated 10.08.2022 and to allow the Opposite Party/Petitioner to contest the original complaint case by presenting written version. On being heard both sides Ld. District Commission was pleased to reject the Miscellaneous Application filed by the Petitioner/Opposite Party vide order dated 31.08.2022 (order no. 03) with cost of Rs. 5,000/-(five thousand) and disposed of the same.

We have meticulously gone through the contention as highlighted in the memorandum of Revision Petition. The Revisionist/Opposite Party has prayed for setting aside the impugned order dated 31.08.2022 passed by the Ld. District Commission in Miscellaneous Application no. MA/106/2022 arising out of consumer complaint case no. CC/255/2021. We have also considered the submissions of both sides advanced during the course of hearing argument.

At the very outset of discussion it is very much relevant and important to note that the present Revision Petition has been preferred on 6^th September, 2022 by the Revisionist/Opposite Party against the Respondent/Complainant. It is crystal clear from the case record that on 7^th September, 2022 Ld. District Commission was pleased to pass ex parte judgment and order in the said complaint proceeding. Curious enough to note that the Revisionist/Opposite Party did not make any attempt and pray for stay of all further proceedings of the complaint case. Admittedly, the complaint proceeding was finally disposed of on 7^th September, 2022 but the Revisionist/Opposite Party preferred the Revision Petition on 6^th September, 2022. Reasons best known to the Revisionist/Opposite Party as to why they did not file proper application before the Hon’ble State Commission for staying the entire proceeding of the complaint case.

Considering all aspects from all angles and having considered the submissions of both sides and regard being had to the position of law we hold and firmly hold that the impugned order dated 31.08.2022 passed in the Miscellaneous Application being no. 106/2022 does not suffer any irregularity or illegality. We do not find any reason or justification to interfere with the observation of the Ld. District Commission It is the settled principle of law that the District Commission cannot recall its own order with the aid of such miscellaneous application. Law is exhaustive on this aspect. Moreover, the complaint case has already attained its finality. Thus being the position we are constrained to hold that the present Revision Petition filed by the Revisionist/Opposite Party is liable to be dismissed.

Hence,

O R D E R E D

That the present Revision Petition being RP/106/2022 be and the same is dismissed on contest but considering the circumstances without any order as to costs.

Thus, the Revision Petition stands disposed of.

Note accordingly.