HON’BLE MR. SUDEB MITRA, PRESIDING MEMBER

Order No. : 9

Date : 11.12.2024   

     Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the order dated 15.12.2023, passed by the Ld. DCDRC, Purba Bardhaman in CC/07/2022 by pronouncing which the Ld. Concerned DCDRC, Purba Bardhaman was pleased to dismiss the CC/07/2022 for default against the complaint of CC/07/2022 Itu Rani Mukherjee, without cost, for her failure to show cause/assign reasons by 15.12.2023 as to why CC/07/2022 shall not be dismissed for default, the complainant of CC/07/2022, Itu Rani Mukherjee has preferred the instant Appeal (A/08/2024 dated 27.01.2024) praying for setting aside the impugned order dated 15.12.2023 passed in CC/07/2022 by the Ld. DCDRC, Purba Bardhaman.

    It has been asserted by the Ld. Counsel for the Appellant side of this Appeal that the Appellant/Complainant Itu Rani Mukherjee had filed CC/07/2022 on 19.01.2022 before the Ld. DCDRC, Purba Bardhaman against the OPs of CC/07/2022 on the ground of it’s deficiency in service and ‘unfair trade practice’ for the OPs not making reimbursement of Medical Expenses incurred from her for meeting medical expenses, in spite of her remaining properly insured with Health Insurance Coverage under the OPs of CC/07/2022 and this A/08/2024 at the relevant time of her incurring medical expenses for medical attention.

    It is the specific case of the Appellant/complainant of A/8/2024 and CC/07/2022, respectively that she was prosecuting her filed CC/07/2022 before the Ld. DCDRC, Purba Bardhaman by taking proper steps in the proceedings of CC/07/2022 and contesting with the OPs in CC/07/2022, but her retained Ld. Counsel was found irregular for his own personal reasons and for his inadvertence, she (Complainant/Appellant) could not take proper steps in the CC/07/2022 and failed to file answer to the ‘show cause’ notice directed by the Ld. DCDRC concerned to be answered by her in CC/07/2022 and for that reason the Ld. DCDRC, Purba Bardhaman was pleased to pass the impugned order dated 15.12.2023 in CC/07/2022 and dismissed the CC/07/2022 for default against her/complainant of CC/07/2022.

    By filing the instant Appeal on 27.01.2024, the appellant of A/08/2024, Itu Rani Mukherjee has prayed for setting aside the impugned judgement of CC/07/2022 dated 15.12.2023 for enabling her to contest in CC/07/2022.

    The complainant has submitted that the impugned judgement (dated 15.12.2023) in CC/07/2022 is bad in law and is against evidence on record and is thereby erroneous and is pronounced without hearing the complainant/appellant and without consideration of fact that because of the inadvertence of the complainant’s retained lawyer in CC/07/2022, the complainant by remaining at dark, sustained the negative result of the impugned order of CC/07/2022 dated 15.12.2023, for no fault of her own.

Point for consideration

    Now it is to be determined as to whether and how far the instant Appeal is entertainable and it is to be assessed further as to whether, the impugned order dated 15.12.2023 passed in CC/07/2022 deserves any interference, according to law.

Decision with reasons

    The case record of CC/07/2022 reveals that the complaint case was filed on 19.01.2022 by the complainant/appellant Itu Rani Mukherjee against the OPs of CC/07/2022 and A/8/2024 as well, before the Ld. DCDRC, Purba Bardhaman.

    It transpires that during the continuation of the proceedings of CC/07/2022 before Ld. DCDRC, Purba Bardhaman, 27.07.2023 was fixed for filing evidence on chief by the OPs of CC/07/2022 on Affidavit and on that day the complainant and her Ld. Advocate were absent and consequently on prayer of the OPs in CC/07/2022, Ld. Concerned DCDRC was pleased to fix 07.09.2023 for filing evidence on affidavit by the OPs of CC/07/2022.

    On 07.09.2023 complainant was absent in CC/07/2022 but the OPs had submitted evidence on affidavit in CC/07/2020 on that date and 24.11.2023 was fixed for filing of questionnaire by the complainant without fail. On 24.11.2023, in CC/07/2022, the complainant of CC/07/2022 was absent on calls and none appeared from her end in the proceeding of CC/07/2022. Resultantly, the Ld. DCDRC, Purba Bardhaman was pleased to fix 15.12.2023 for showing cause by the complainant as to why CC/07/2022 shall not be dismissed for default. The case record shows that on 15.12.2023, the complainant of CC/07/2022 neither turned up, nor represented and nor filed show cause reply in response to the direction of the Ld. DCDRC concerned dated 24.11.2023.

    As a result, the Ld. DCDRC, Purba Bardhaman was pleased to dismiss the CC/07/2022 for default against the complainant of CC/07/2022 i.e. against the petitioner/complainant of CC/07/2022 without cost.

   Against the order dated 15.12.2023, the complainant of CC/07/2022 has preferred the present Appeal on time seeking setting aside of the said order dated 15.12.2023 passed in CC/07/2022 by the Ld. DCDRC, Purba Bardhaman.

   On scanning the available materials on record, weighing the submissions of the contesting parties of this Appeal and assessing the contents of recriminations of the contesting Ld. Lawyers of the contesting parties of this Appeal and considering the merits of the orders passed by the Ld. DCDRC in CC/7/2022 to rationalize the concluding order dated 15.12.2023 passed in CC/07/2022, I feel inclined to hold that the relevant orders passed in CC/07/2022, as mentioned in the contents of this judgement deserves no interference and the same are correct, cohesive to each other, legally sustainable and having natural and legal and legitimate sequences is result of probable consequence, for not taking steps in CC/07/2022 by it’s complainant and for not complying with the direction of the Ld. DCDRC, Purba Bardhaman, given to the complainant of CC/07/2022 legally, requiring specific compliance.

    So, there remains no cogent graced to interfere with impugned order dated 15.12.2023, passed in CC/07/2022 by the Ld. DCDRC, Purba Bardhaman.

    However, for the ends of justice, and according to my best assessed judgement since the complainant has been intending to contest in the CC/07/2022 so, for the ends of justice, the complainant/appellant is given the scopes to contest in the CC/07/2022 by filing questionnaire within 28 days from this date of order without fail against the evidence on affidavit filed by the OPs in CC/07/2023.

    The submission of the Ld. Counsel for the OPs of this Appeal for cost impostion against the appellant is not entertained for the ends of justice.

      Accordingly, it is

                                                ORDERED

That the instant Appeal be and the same is allowed in part but without cost.

    The impugned order dated 15.12.2023 passed by the Ld. DCDRC, Purba Bardhaman in CC/07/2022 stands modified to the extent that within 28 days from this date of order in this A/08/2024 the complainant of CC/07/2022 Itu Rani Mukherjee shall file questionnaire in CC/07/2022 after observance of all due legal formalities and by serving specific copy of the same to the OPs of CC/07/2022 and thereafter the Ld. DCDRC, Purba Bardhaman shall proceed further with the proceedings of CC/07/2022, on observance of all legal formalities, according to law.

    Accordingly this Appeal is disposed of on merit, with certain modification as reflected above, in the order dated 15.12.2023, passed in CC/07/2022 by the Ld. DCDRC, Purba Bardhaman.