This revision petition is directed against the order dated 12/12/2017, 17/01/2018 and 04/04/2018 passed by Ld. D.C.D..R.F Siliguri, in CC/69/S/2015.

The fact of the case in nutshell is that one Smt. Sangita Sharma registered a consumer complaint against the revisionist SICC limited under section 12 OF CP Act 1986 which was admitted on merit and the revisionist company was served notice of consumer dispute. The OP/ revisionist appeared through legal counsel on 18/09/2015 and prayed for time to file W.V. on next day.  But on repeated dates the OP could not file the W.V. Subsequently the OP submitted the W.V. beyond the statutory period of limitations. But the Ld. Forum for the ends of justice accepted the said W.V. and proceed with the case by recording evidences of complainant side. After the evidence of complainant the OP was asked to  adduce the evidences. On 16/05/2017 the OP filed additional W.V. evidence-in-chief and questionnaire. The said application of the OP was heard and rejected  by the Ld. Forum on 12/12/2017 on the ground that as argument of the case was already fixed and the Ld. Forum by that order dated 12/12/017 placed the case for hearing ex-parte against the revisionist on 17/01/2018. On 17/01/2018 and next date on 04/04/2018 the Ld. Forum could not hear the case due to adjournment on the part of the complainant. The revisionist prefers the revision before Hon’ble State Commission, Kolkata Bench against the order of Ld. Forum dated 12/12/2017, 17/01/2018 and 04/04/2018 though in the index page of the memo of revision the date of 12/12/2017 and 17/01/2018 was struck out. The Hon’ble Kolkata Bench admitted the revision application and secured the presence of  the OP/ Complainant on record. There after the case was reassigned here for disposal. Both parties of this revision has recorded their presence before this bench through  Ld. Advocates. Accordingly,  the revision application is heard in presence of both sides.

Decision with reason,

Having heard the legal counsels of both sides, this commission find that actually order dated 12/12/2017 is revisable one as because on that day Ld. Forum after rejecting the OPs prayer has passed the order to hear the case ex-parte. The order dated 17/01/2018 and 04/04/2018 was nothing but the adjournment prayer of the complainant was entertained. During the course of argument  Ld. Advocate of OP S. Mitruka  mentions that the order dated 12/12/2017 which is actually revisable one has crossed the outer statutory limit and for that reason the revision application should be rejected. The Commission agrees with  the contention of the Ld. Advocate as because revision application against any order should be submitted within 90 days. But here in this case the revision was registered on 28/05/2018  and to save the case from the hit of statutory limitation the date of 12/12/2017 and 17/01/2018 was  struck out keeping the date 04/04/2018 intact to show that revision was registered in due time in the index page of the application while in the original revisional applications the date of 12/12/2017 , 17/01/2018 and 04/04/2018 remained intact. Here in this case the W.V. of OP has already accepted. The OP wants to contest the case before the Ld. Forum by filing additional W.V. and evidence-in-chief along with questionnaires which was rejected by the forum on 12/12/2017. Curiously enough is that without admitting the revision in strict sense of the term the respondents was served notice and the proceeding of the consumer case pending before the  Ld. Forum was stayed and there after the  revision was reassigned here. So there is a scope to allow the revisionist to contest the case at the stage of argument for the interest of justice before the Ld. Forum.

Hence, it is ordered,

That the revisional application is allowed on contest without any cost . The order of Ld. D.C.D.R.F Siliguri, dated 12/12/2017, 17/01/2018 and 04/04/2018 in (CC/69/S/2015) stands vacated. The revisionist/OP is permitted to participate in the process of hearing argument before the Ld. Forum on the date to be fixed by the Ld. Forum.  Ld. Forum is permitted to accept the additional W.V. of OP and Evidence-in-chief of OP at the time of hearing argument of the case and to settle the dispute by delivery of final order. The questionnaires submitted by the OP need not be entertained. Both the parties are asked to appear before the Ld. Forum on 5/03/2020 for further proceedings . let a copy of this order be sent to Ld. D.C.D.R.F Siliguri. Free copy of this order be supplied to the parties free of cost.