Sri Subhra Sankar Bhatta, Judicial Member

Revisionists/Petitioners are found absent on repeated call.

Ld. Counsel appearing for the Respondent nos. 1 and 2 is present.

Today is fixed for passing order on merit.

It is the settled principle of law that the Revision Petition cannot be and should not be dismissed for default. It should be heard and considered on merit.

The present Revisional Application has been preferred by the Revisionists/Petitioners viz. 1) Sri Supravat Dutta and 2) Miss Mili Dutta assailing the impugned order dated 17.07.2019 vide order no. 16 passed by the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Kolkata—I (North) in connection with Consumer complaint case no. CC/162/2018 whereby Ld. Forum below was pleased to pass the following order:-

“ORDERED

Ld. Advocate for the Complainant files a petition stating that he wants to examine both the OPs on dock.

The OP had already submitted by swearing an affidavit that the said Register is not maintained. Apart from the said fact, at the time of hearing of this case the Complainant has raised this point and the OPs had already given reply in respect of the questionnaire put by the OP vis-à-vis the Complainant has also put questionnaire to the OPs which has been replied by the O.Ps.

In view of such background of the case, in order to delay the hearing of this case has filed the false and frivolous petition and accordingly the petition is rejected.

After passing of such order the Complainant files a petition stating that against such order Complainant will prefer a revision application before the Hon’ble State Commission and accordingly the prayer is allowed.

Fix 20.08.2019 for bringing an effective order from the Hon’ble State Commission i.d. argument will be heard.”

In the body of the Revision Petition it has been categorically contended that the impugned order of the Ld. Commission below is bad in law and liable to be quashed and set aside in limini; that the Ld. Forum below passed the impugned order erroneously without any application of judicial mind; that the Ld. Forum below passed the impugned order with material irregularities exceeding jurisdiction; that the Ld. Forum below failed to appreciate that insurance company has to maintain data kept surrender document and register and the insurance company has to give progress report yearly before the audit. On all such ground the Revisionists/Petitioners have preferred the present Revision Petition praying for allowing the same after setting aside the order impugned.

The case record goes to indicate that the Revisionists/Petitioners were found absent before this Commission on 26.09.2022, 27.04.2023 and 10.08.2023 respectively. Undisputedly, Revisionists/Petitioners were given several opportunity to contest the present Revision Petition but they did not turn up. Such performance of the Revisionists/Petitioners speaks a lot about the truthfulness of the case and proves beyond doubt that the Revisionists/Petitioners are not willing to proceed with the present Revision Petition.

We have meticulously gone through the impugned order dated 17.07.2019 passed by the Ld. Forum below. We do not find any irregularity, propriety or illegality in the impugned order passed by the Ld. Forum below. Thus being the position we have no hesitation to conclude that the impugned order does not deserve interference of this State Commission.

The said order requires to be sustained in the eye of law.

It is, therefore,

O R D E R E D

That the present Revision Petition being no. 78/2019 be and the same is dismissed on merit but considering the circumstances without any order as to costs.

That the impugned order passed by the Ld. Forum below on 17.07.2019 vide order no. 17 in Consumer Complaint Case no.CC/162/2018 is hereby affirmed.

Interim stay, if any, be vacated forthwith.

Thus, the Revision Petition stands disposed of.

Let a copy of this order be transmitted to the Ld. Commission below at once for information and taking necessary action.