DIST. CONSUMER  DISPUTES  REDRESSAL  FORUM

NORTH 24 Pgs., BARASAT.

  M.A. 220/2018

C.C. NO- 275/2017

Date of Filing:                                                                                                Date of Disposal:

 02.08.2018                                                                                                       02.08.2018

Dhr/s :-                          1.       Jhuma Sikdar,

W/o Sri Anjan Sikdar,

Residing at

Lalit Gupta Street,

P.O & P.S- Nimta,

Kolkata- 700049

=Vs=

Jdr/s:-                            1.       M/s Bose Construction

A proprietorship firm,

Having its Office at 14-TN

Chaterjee Street,

P.S- Baranagar,

Kolkata- 700090

Represented by its Sole Proprietor

Susoma Bose

W/O Late Ashim Kr. Bose

Residing at 51/2 Sarat Chandra Dhar Road,

P.S- Baranagar, Kolkata- 700090

2.       Smt. Saraswati Ghosh,

W/O Late Shyam Sunder Ghosh

3.       Smt. Sona Rani Ghosh

W/O Late Binod Behari Ghosh

4.       Sri Paritosh Ghosh,

S/O Late Binod Behari Ghosh

5.       Sri Malay Ghosh

S/o Lat Binod Behari Ghosh,

6.       Smt. Shipra Ghosh

W/O Late Santosh Ghosh

7.       Smt. Sima Ghosh

Daughter of Late Santosh Ghosh,

8.       Sri Ruma Ghosh

Daughter of Late Santosh Ghosh

9.       Sri Sanjoy Ghosh

S/O Late Santosh Ghosh

Cont…………….2

:2:

All are residing at

252, Lalit Gupta Street,

P.S- Nimta, Kol- 49,

Being represented by their constituted

Attorney Susoma Bose residing at

51/2 Sara Ch. Dhar Road, Kol- 90

P R E S E N T  :-        Bankim Chandra Chattopadhyay………..…..President.

  :-       Smt. SilpiMajumder  ………………………Member.

ORDER No- 06

This order is arising out of the MA being no-220/2018 filed by the OPs in the CC no-275/2017 praying for vacating the ex parte order passed by this Ld. Forum. It is stated by the OPs that if the said order is not vacated and scope not given to the OPs for filing W/V  the OPs will be seriously prejudiced. According to the OPS the prayer should be allowed. The Ld. Counsel for the complainant upon receipt of the application as raised objection stating that if the Ld. Court will permit to give the OPs the scope for filing W/V subject to payment of cost. Hence the complainant has no objection.

Upon careful perusal of the content of the MA filed by the OPs in our view that in view of the land mark Judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in th case of Rajeev Hitendra Paathak & Others Vs. Achyut Kashinath Karekar & Another reported in (2011) 9 SCC, 541 held that the District and the State Commission cannot exercise before which is not specifically mentioned in the statute. Admittedly as per the CP Act this Ld. Forum is not empowered either to recall or review our own order. Therefore as once the ex parte is passed on 09.01.2018 now we cannot review the said order having regard to the Law of this Land.

In view of the abovementioned the MA 220/2018 is hereby dismissed on contest without any cost. Today OPs have filed their W/V as the MA is dismissed W/V filed by the OPs cannot be entertained and hence it is rejected.

Fix  19.11.2018  for argument.

Let plain copy of this order be given to the parties free of cost as per the CPR, 2005.

Member                                                                                                                       President

Dictated & Corrected by