Order No.3         date: 20-03-2015

Ld. Advocate for the Revisionist and the OP in person are present.  Revision is taken up for hearing.

Ld. Advocate for the Revisionist submits that there have been some contradictions in the impugned order.  Although it has been observed by the Ld. District Forum that without taking recourse to evidence, this matter under consideration, i.e., maintainability of the case, could not be considered, but, in effect, the Ld. District Forum has totally rejected the stand of the OP by disposing the said petition dated 25-03-2014 in rejection.  He also submits that the Complainant, i.e., the OP in this revision, has got and received a sum of Rs. 35,742/- without any objection, already.

The OP, i.e., the Complainant, who pleads on his own, submits that out of Rs. 3,42,770/-, Rs. 35,742/- only has been duly received from the Revisionist/OP of the case.  So, there is a valid contention of his in the matter of his petition of complaint. 

Considering all aspects into the matter, it has been rightly held by the Ld. District Forum that the matter requires factoring in evidence, without which no plausible order in the matter of maintainability can be made.  Therefore, in the fitness of the case, it is necessary that the matter be kept alive till final hearing of the case.

Accordingly, the revision is partly allowed.  OP is at liberty to contest the case on the point of maintainability at the time of final hearing of the case.  The impugned order is thus modified.