Learned counsel for the appellant is present.

2.     Mr.R.K.Pattnaik, advocate files vakalatnama on behalf of respondent nos.1 and 2 which is accepted and kept on record.

3.     Mr.B.P.Sarangi,  advocate files vakalatnama on behalf of respondent no.3 which is accepted and kept on record.

4.     Heard learned counsel for both sides.

5.     Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the impugned order has not been passed by the learned District Commission in appropriate manner for entertaining the complaint.

6.     The case of the complainant is that he has met accident and accordingly he filed the claim petition which was surveyed by the surveyor of insurer who repudiated the claim. Learned counsel for the complainant further submitted that he was not given any opportunity   to produce the materials which was annexed to the complaint. Therefore, he submitted to set aside the impugned order dated 11.10.2022 and remand the matter for hearing afresh.

7.     Learned counsel for the O.Ps. submitted that the matter may be remanded to the learned District Commission for fresh disposal.

8.     Considered the submission. Perused the impugned order  dated 11.10.2022 which as follows:-

“xxx                          xxx                   xxx

Case posted today for hearing on admission. Heard. Ld.Counsel for the complainant. There is no sufficient materials to admit the case. Hence, the complainant case stands dismissed at the stage of admission.”

9.     The above order  clearly shows that at the stage of admission the learned  District Commission has not applied judicial mind on the materials available on record   and passed the impugned order. As the fact and materials on record have not been discussed, it cannot be said Commission have  applied judicial mind  to that effect.

10.   Be that as it may, we are  of the opinion that we want to  make it clear that C.P.Act,2019 is enacted with  the  object to protect the interest of consumers. But the learned District Commission ought to have tried to find out as to how to protect the interest of consumers instead of dismissing the complaint by non-speaking order. At the stage of admission learned District Commission should      not pass a cryptic order to dispose of the complaint. There are two steps open for District Commission. At the time of admission, they can ask complainant to produce materials for their satisfaction to issue notice and after hearing they can either admit or dismiss. Second step is that District Commission can admit complaint and issue notices to OP for filing written version and  proceed with  disposal of complaint. Either of step should be adopted by DCDRC. In  case of former method DCDRC has to pass speaking order while  not admitting complaint. Therefore,  the impugned order should be  set aside and it is set aside.

11.   However, we remand the matter to the learned District Commission with direction  to issue notice to both parties to participate in the hearing by filing written version and dispose of the matter in accordance with law by passing speaking order.It is made clear that the learned District Commission is to dispose of the matter after perusing materials available on record after hearing both parties. Further, the learned District Commission is directed to dispose of the matter within a period of 45 days  from the date of receipt of this order. Both parties  are directed to appear before the learned District Commission on 27.04.2023 to take further instruction from it.

12.   The appeal is disposed of accordingly.

        DFR be sent back forthwith.

        Supply free copy of this order to the respective parties or the copy of this order be downloaded from Confonet or Website of this Commission to treat same as copy supplied from this Commission.