| STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION | | WEST BENGAL | | 11A, Mirza Ghalib Street, Kolkata - 700087 |
|
| |
| Revision Petition No. RP/31/2022 | | ( Date of Filing : 21 Mar 2022 ) | | (Arisen out of Order Dated 11/02/2022 in Case No. CC/198/2021 of District Kolkata-I(North)) |
| | | | 1. Nilam Jaiswal & Anr. | | W/o, Sri Santosh Kumar Jaiswal. 22, Nabin Kundu Lane, P.S.- Amherst Street, Kolkata- 700 009. | | 2. Santosh Kumar Jaiswal | | 22, Nabin Kundu Lane, P.S.- Amherst Street, Kolkata- 700 009. |
| ...........Appellant(s) | |
| Versus | | 1. M/s. Shib Tara Construction & Ors. | | 169/2D, A.P.C Road, P.S.- Shyampukur, P.O.- Shyampukur, Kolkata- 700 004. | | 2. Tapas Paul | | S/o, Nirmal Kumar Paul. 474, R.N.Guha Road, P.O.- Motijhil, Kolkata- 700 074. | | 3. Probash Kumar Das | | S/o, Gour Chandra Das. 169/2D, A.P.C Road, P.S.- Shyampukur, P.O.- Shyampukur, Kolkata- 700 004. | | 4. Pankaj Kumar Kapileshwari | | S/o, Lt Gobinda Kapileshwari. C/8-5, Kalindi Housing Estate, Kolkata- 700 089, P.S.- Laketown, P.O.- Sreebhumi. |
| ...........Respondent(s) |
|
|
| |
| BEFORE: | | | | HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJIT MANDAL PRESIDENT | | | HON'BLE MRS. SAMIKSHA BHATTACHARYA MEMBER | | | HON'BLE MR. SHYAMAL KUMAR GHOSH MEMBER | |
| |
| PRESENT: | Mr. B. K. Singh, Mr. D. K. Charkarvarti, Indrani Dey, Advocate for the Petitioner 1 | | | Adnan Ahmed, Advocate for the Respondent 1 | | | Adnan Ahmed, Advocate for the Respondent 1 | | | Adnan Ahmed, Advocate for the Respondent 1 | | | Smt. Mousumi Chakraborty, Sayantan Banerjee, Koushik Kr. Roy, Advocate for the Respondent 1 | |
| Dated : 14 Jun 2023 |
| Final Order / Judgement | HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJIT MANDAL, PRESIDENT - This revision petition has been filed under section 47(i)(b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 ( in short, ‘the Act’) challenging the order No. 6 dated 11.02.2022 passed by the Learned Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Kolkata-I (North) ( in short, the ‘District Forum’) in connection with complaint case No. CC/198/2021.
- Heard the Learned Advocates appearing for both the parties over the revisional application at length and in full. Perused the materials on record including the impugned order No. 6 dated 11.02.2022 and the revision petition.
- The revisionists / complainants filed a complaint case before the Learned District Forum, Unit – I for registration and handing over the peaceful and vacant possession of the residential flat at premises No. 11/2 Telipara Lane, Kolkata – 700 004 as per the agreement for sale dated 23.07.2017.
- The opposite parties entered appearance in this case by filing written version.
- During pendency of the complaint case, the revisionists / complainants filed an application on 08.02.2022 with a prayer for interim injunction and the interim injunction was allowed. Thereafter, the said injunction application was heard by the District Forum and after hearing, the said injunction application filed by the complainants was dismissed and the interim injunction granted by the Commission was recalled by the impugned order.
- Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the said order, the revisionists have preferred this revisional application.
- The Learned District Forum was pleased to pass an order of recalling the injunction order and the injunction application was disposed of and all interim orders were accordingly vacated. The Learned District Forum below has observed the following which is reproduced as under :-
“The injunction petition has no basis and claim of the complainants is prima facie not according to law and according to the agreement as the agreement has been terminated and it is a fact that the complainants received Rs. 10,00,000/- (Rupees ten lakh only). So, prima facie, it appears that there is no existence of agreement between the complainant and the opposite parties. So, the injunction petition has no basis.” - The above observation as made by the Learned District Forum below appears to be just and equitable in the facts of the case. No palpable, crucial error in appreciating the facts of the case is visible, no jurisdictional error, or legal principle ignored, or miscarriage of justice is visible.
- Interference in exercise of the revisional jurisdiction of this Commission is not warranted.
- The revision petition being ill-conceived and bereft of merit, is dismissed.
- The District Forum’s order No. 6 dated 11.02.2022 is confirmed.
- The order made by the Learned District Forum is, therefore, sustained.
- The revisional application is, thus, disposed of accordingly. The Registry of this Commission is directed to send a copy of this order to the District Forum as early as possible.
| |
| |
| | | [HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJIT MANDAL] | PRESIDENT
| | | | | | [HON'BLE MRS. SAMIKSHA BHATTACHARYA] | MEMBER
| | | | | | [HON'BLE MR. SHYAMAL KUMAR GHOSH] | MEMBER
| | | |
