Date : 10.02.2016
DEBASIS BHATTACHARYA, PRESIDING MEMBER
This revision has arisen mainly out of an order allowing the delay condonation petition of the Complainant in CC/12/2015 of the Ld. District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Kolkata, Unit-II (in short, District Forum).
It has been submitted by the Ld. Advocate for the Revisionists that the Ld. District Forum concerned has suo motu allowed in delay condonation prayer of the Complainant, which is illegal and bad in law. It is a material irregularity and the Ld. District Forum has travelled beyond the practice and procedure as established. Further, according to Section 13 (1) (a) of the Consumer Protection Act 1986, the OP is to be given thirty days time to give his version of such case or such extended period not exceeding fifteen days. But, in this case, a lesser time has been provided by the Ld. District Forum. In this respect, he has referred to a decision of the Hon’ble National Commission reported in2015 (1) CPR 382 (NC), where it has been made out that the Consumer Forum can not give shorter notice without assigning any reasons.
On the other hand, the Ld. Advocate for the OP No. 1 has submitted that the Complainant filed a petition raising limitation point on 15.03.2015, to which the Complainant filled w.o. on 18.03. 2015, and the said petition has been rejected vide order no. 06 dated 18.03.2015. On 18.03.2015, the OP further prayed for time for filling w.v., which is more than thirty days time prescribed.
There is no such stipulation that limitation matter can not be decided upon hearing the Complainant only. In this matter, there has been a delay of seven days in filling the complaint, which has been allowed by the Ld. District Forum vide order no. 02 dated 21.01.2015. On a consideration of the whole spectrum of the matter, there is found to be least merit in the present revision. No specific and strong ground is there in this revision, which can not sustain. The revision fails and stands dismissed.
