HON’BLE JUSTICE SRI A. CHAKRABARTI, PRESIDENT.

No. 4/29.09.2008.

Appellant through Mr. Arijit Das, the Ld. Advocate and Respondent No. 1 through Miss Roychoudhuary, the Ld. Advocate are present.  Respondent No. 1 files BNA with a copy to the other side.  Heard the Ld. Advocate for the Appellant as well as the Respondent No. 1.  Respondent No. 2 though has been served and A/D has come back has not entered appearance at any stage.  We have perused the impugned order by which the complaint petition was rejected holding that the Forum did not find any material to show that the Complainant is a consumer under the C. P. Act and the disputes do not relate to consumer dispute.  Unfortunately the order is absolutely silent as to the reasons on which said finding has been arrived at.  At the time of argument we have found that the Ld. Advocate for the Appellant as also the Ld. Advocate for the Respondent No. 1 argued on mere guesswork.  Miss Roychoudhuary, the Ld. Advocate for the Respondent No. 1 argued on the basis of the pleadings in the complaint.  We do not find from the pleadings themselves that the service of the service provider being the Respondent No. 1 has been shown as taken for commercial purpose and no material in support thereof was appearing before the Ld. Forum while the impugned order was passed nor it has been shown by the Respondent No. 1 before us at the time of hearing.  In the circumstances we quash the impugned order and the matter is sent back before the Forum below for considering the matter on material available on record and for disposal of the same for reasons to be recorded in the order.  The appeal is allowed on contest against the Respondent No. 1 and ex parte against the rest.  We make it clear that we have not decided as to whether the Complainant is a consumer or not as presently there is no material to find the same.