HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJIT MANDAL, PRESIDENT
1. The transfer application has been filed for transferring the consumer case being No. CC/79/2020 filed by the applicant from District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission at Baruipur, South 24 Parganas to the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Sealdah.
2. The applicant has raised the following grounds for transfer of the aforementioned complaint case-
- Because the Ld. District Commission intentionally has delayed the case and does not want to dispose of the case by any means.
- Because the transfer applicant met with the Ld. President of the District Commission at Baruipur in his chamber in the month of August, 2022. The Ld. President of the said Commission wanted a bribe of Rs.50,000/- from the applicant for speedy disposal and favour him of the said case.
- Because the applicant protested against the Ld. President of District Commission, Baruipur for all types of malpractices and illegality in the said Commission i.e. Ld. President’s House is in the Narendrapur area under South 24 Parganas but despite being a resident of this district, he has been posted as President of the Baruipur District Commission.
- Because the Ld. President harassed him and did not allow him to get the certified copy as well as to inspect the said case record.
3. (a) In order to substantiate the aforesaid grounds, the applicant has mentioned the following facts. Mr. Ashoke Kumar Pal, Ld. President has intentionally delayed the case and does not want to dispose of the case by any means, for which the applicant when met with the said President in his chamber in the month of August, 2022, then the Ld. President wanted a bribe of Rs.50,000/- from the applicant for speedy disposal and favour him in the said case and when the applicant refused to pay the money, the said President of Baruipur District Commission threatened the applicant,
(b) The applicant earlier protested against the President of District Commission for all types of malpractices and irregularity in the said Commission i.e. the Ld. President’s house is in Narendrapur area under South 24 Parganas but despite being a resident of this district he has been posted as President of the Baruipur District Commission which is illegal and also unconstitutional and he has been starting the Bench at 12:10 P.M. instead of 10:30 in the morning and the Commission left the Bench between 2P.M. to 2:30 P.M. and every case is provided dates after two months or even three months and always says our diary is not permitting.
(c) On 06.01.2023, the authorised person of the applicant went to the Baruipur District Commission to inspect the said case record and applied for a certified copy, being MA Case No. 19 of 2022 arising out of complaint case No. CC/79/2020. But one Sri Samarjit Mondal @ Samar and Ld. President Mr. Ashoke Kumar Pal harassed him and did not allow him to get the certified copy as well as inspect the said case record for the said reason. After that, on the same day at about 2 P.M. applicant went to Baruipur District Commission to inspect his case record after observing all formalities. But the said Samarjit Mondal @ Samar and Ld. President Mr. Ashoke Kumar Pal kept him sitting for more than two hours and tortured him mentally and physically and also harassed him and abused him.
4. On the basis of these facts, the allegations have been made against the President, District Commission, Baruipur, South 24 Parganas.
5. I have considered the arguments of both sides.
6. As regards delay of the case, I find that since service of notice pertaining to the consumer case No. CC/79/2020 all along proper and necessary steps were taken on behalf of OPs. However, applicant files several multiple interlocutory applications in the said complaint case including the institution of revisional application before this Commission for getting reliefs to the complaint case. But the applicant himself dragged the complaint case for an indefinite period in as much as until disposal of such interlocutory applications, the original petition of complaint could not be heard on its own merit.
7. As regards demanding of bribe of Rs.50,000/- by the Ld. President of the Baruipur District Commission from the applicant when the applicant entered into his chamber, I find that applicant being a litigant are not entitled to meet with the President of the Ld. District Commission below nor its Ld. Members and attempt of personal meeting with such members raise reasonable doubt with regard to conduct of the applicant. I think that the said allegations are absolutely unsubstantiated and devoid of any cogent proof and consequently no reliance could be made thereon.
8. As regards Ld. President’s house is in Narendrapur area under South 24 Parganas and he has been posted as President of Baruipur District Commission which is illegal and also unconstitutional, I find that posting of the President in the same district, I think that there is no bar either in the Act or the extant rules about posting of President or Members in the same district where they permanently reside and as such in my opinion such allegation is baseless and motivated.
9. As regards, the allegation of not sitting in time and giving long dates in cases, I am of the view that without any specific reference of any specific case or date, no steps for such general allegation can be entertained.
10. As regards the allegation that complainant went to the Ld. District Commission to inspect the case record but the Ld. President and one Samarjit harassed him and did not allow him to get the certified copy as well as to inspect the said case record. Subsequently, applicant personally went to District Commission to inspect the case record but the said Samarjit and Ld. President also kept him sitting for more than two hours and tortured him.
11. With regard to the said allegation, I find that the applicant has not filed any papers and or documents to prove before this Commission that on 06.01.2023, the authorised person of the applicant and the applicant went to District Commission and they were harassed by one Samarjit Mondal and the Ld. President. So, this allegation is absolutely devoid of any proof.
12. Under these facts and circumstances and on consideration of the materials available on record, I am of the view that only on the basis of some orders passed in connection with the case, no inferrence can be drawn against the Ld. President that the Ld. District Commission has been biased. There is also no material on the record to substantiate the allegations.
13. Making allegations so that the Commission transfers a case is very known tactics for the Forum choosing and to avoid a Bench which may strict or not any reasonably lenient and to delay a case in which favourable order could not be received under the law.
14. In this case, the allegation appears to be without any basis.
15.In such situation, transferring the case on the ground of allegations by one substantiate will help in achieving the end for which the allegation was falsely made.
16. Transfer Applicant in support of his argument has relied on the following three judgements- (1972)(II) GLR 649, AIR (1968) Cal. 512 and AIR (1931) Kol. 626. However, relying of these three judgements in the adjudication of this matter, facts being at variance, would be misplaced.
17. Therefore, I hold that it is not sufficient ground for transferring the case. The transfer application is, therefore, rejected.
18. The transfer application is, thus, disposed of accordingly.
