SAMIKSHA BHATTACHARYA, MEMBER

tHIS IS  to consider the application being No. 848/2022 filed by OP No. 1/the Chairman, Ruby  General Hospital Limited.

The Ld. Advocate for the OP No. 1 has submitted that   though the matter was fixed  on 27.07.2022 for filing evidence on  affidavit on behalf of the applicant and OP No. 1 as last chance but the OP No. 2 was  unable to file evidence on affidavit since  the conducting Advocate of the petitioner namely, Mr. Atish Majumder was  conducting another consumer complaint case being No. CC/74/2021 which was fixed  for final   argument at Kolkata Unit-IV, Sealdah  and could not make it  in time  take to reach this Commission. On 27.07.2022 the  final argument in the abovementioned case was  ended at 3:30 p.m. and by that time, the court hours  of this Commission was over. The conducting Advocate of OP No. 1 could not able to  file evidence on affidavit and was unable to reach  there on time due to unavoidable circumstances as mentioned in the petition. Due to these chaotic circumstances, the  conducting  Advocate of the OP No. 1  could  not filed the  evidence on affidavit which was already  prepared for   filing.

The photocopy of the court diary has been annexed. The applicant/OP No. 1 prays  for accepting the evidence and opportunity be given to be cross-examined otherwise the petitioner shall suffer irreparable loss apart  from  miscarriage of justice. Hence, the Interlocutory Application  praying for allowing  the application filed by  the OP No. 1 to submit the evidence on affidavit  by the OP No. 1

Ld. Advocate for the complainant has not filed any written objection against the instant Application. The Ld. Advocate for the complainant  submitted before this Commission that he has no objection if the  Interlocutory Application being No. IA/848/2022 is allowed.

Upon hearing the Ld. Advocate for the OP No. 1/IA applicant and the Ld. Advocate for the complainant and also on perusal of the  entire materials on record  particularly, the order dated 27.07.2022 it appears to us that on 27.07.2022 was fixed for filing evidence on affidavit  by OP No. 1 and OP No. 3. Though  vide  Order No. 21 dated 11.04.2022). Firstly,. The date was fixed on 11.04.2022 for filing evidence on affidavit by the OPs on 11.04.2022 only OP No. 2 filed evidence on affidavit. However,  the next date i.e.,  27/07.2022 was fixed for  filing evidence on affidavit by OPs  No. 1 & 3. We have   also perused  the photocopy of the diary of the Ld. Advocate Mr. Atish Majumder. The photocopy of the diary has been annexed in support of the submission of the Ld. Advocate on behalf of the OP No. 1. But the statute has  not given any  opportunity to the State Commission to modify, alter or  recall our own order. As per statute, we  are not in a position to modify the order dated 22.07.2022. Moreover, as per Section 50 of the CP  Act, 2019  we cannot review the order dated 22.07.2022 since there is no  apparent error on the face of the record. Though the complainant has not  raised any objection against the application  filed by the OP No. 1, we cannot pass any orderwhich is not permissible as per statute. In such situation, we  have no option but to reject the application being No. IA/848/2022 since not permissible in law.

Consequently, the  Interlocutory Application being No IA/848/2022 is rejected on contest.

There is no order as to costs.

The IA being No. IA/848/2022 is  disposed of accordingly.