West Bengal

Kolkata-I(North)

MA/172/2023

Mr. Manabendra Saha Ray - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s. STECEM CONSTRUCTION COMPANY - Opp.Party(s)

21 Aug 2023

ORDER

Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Kolkata - I (North)
8B, Nelie Sengupta Sarani, 4th Floor, Kolkata-700087.
Web-site - confonet.nic.in
 
Miscellaneous Application No. MA/172/2023
( Date of Filing : 23 Jun 2023 )
In
Complaint Case No. CC/107/2023
 
1. Mr. Manabendra Saha Ray
S/o Late Manmatha Saha Ray, Flat No. 2C, 2nd Floor, Premises No. 152A, Tarak Pramanick Road, P.S. - Girish Park, P.O. - Beadon Street, Kolkata - 700006.
2. Mrs. Sanchita Saha Ray
W/o Mr. Manabendra Saha Ray, Flat No. 2C, 2nd Floor, Premises No. 152A, Tarak Pramanick Road, P.S. - Girish Park, P.O. - Beadon Street, Kolkata - 700006.
...........Appellant(s)
Versus
1. M/s. STECEM CONSTRUCTION COMPANY
6, Bhuban Sarkar Lane, P.S. - Jorasanko (Now Girish Park), Kolkata - 700007.
2. Mangal Kumar Ganguly
Partner of M/S Stecem Construction Company, HA-3/10, Zarda Bagan, P.S. - Rajarhat, Kolkata - 700059.
3. Satyendra Kumar Pramanik
S/o Late Rakhal Das Pramanik, Premises No. 154, Tarak Pramanik Road, P.S. - Girish Park, Kolkata - 700006.
...........Respondent(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MRS. Firoza Khatoon PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MR. Sailaranjan Das MEMBER
 
PRESENT:
 
Dated : 21 Aug 2023
Final Order / Judgement

Order No. 2

Ld. Advocate for the complainants / petitioners is present.

Ld. Advocate for O.P. No. 1 & 2 and Ld. Advocate for O.P. no. 3 are present.

The Misc. Application dated 23/06/2023 is taking up for hearing,

Perused. Considered.

Heard the Ld. Advocate for the complainants / Petitioners.

Ld. Advocate for O.P. No. 3 raised no objection against the interim order passed by this Commission on 23/06/2023.

Ld. Advocate for the complainants/petitioners pray for permanent order of injunction against the opposite parties in terms of order no.1 dated 23/06/2023 on the grounds that if during pendency of CC/107/2023 the opposite party transfers and/or assign the flat in question mentioned in the schedules of the complaint to any third party, it would invite multiplicity of cases and proceedings between the parties.

Ld. Advocate for the opposite party nos.1 and 2 raised objection on the grounds that after passing of order no.1 dated 23/06/2023, the complainants/petitioners have not complied the provision under Order 39 Rule 3(a)(b) of the Code of Civil Procedure. As such, no permanent order of injunction can be passed in favour of the complainants/petitioners.

It is needless to mention that Order 39 of the Code of Civil Procedure is not applicable under the Consumer Protection Act 2019, but the District Commission has power to pass such interim order as is just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case in favour the parties under provision of Section 38(8) of the Consumer Protection Act,2019.

Therefore, in our considered view that for non compliance of Order 39 Rule 3(a)(b), the interim order by this Commission vide order no.1 dated 23/06/2023 is liable to be vacated. No such provision has been laid down in the Consumer Protection Act,2019.

Therefore, to avoid multiplicity of cases and proceedings between the parties, the order passed vide order no.1 dated 23/06/2023 is hereby made absolute and it will remain in force till disposal of the complaint case being no.CC/107/2023.

Thus, the Misc. Application dated 23/06/2023 is disposed of on contest but without cost.

 
 
[HON'BLE MRS. Firoza Khatoon]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Sailaranjan Das]
MEMBER
 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.