Order no. 2                          Dated 09/12.2022

Ld. Advocate for the complainant/petitioner is also present.

Ld. Advocate for the opposite parties is present.

The Misc. Application filed by the complainant/petitioner is taken up for hearing.

Perused. Considered. Heard both sides.      

The complainant/petitioner files the Misc. Application praying for granting leave to the complainant/petitioner to file supplementary affidavit annexing the Resolution dated 17.05.2021 of the Board of ‘Namaste Management Pvt. Ltd’.

In reply Ld. Advocate for the opposite parties raised strong objection against the prayer of the complainant/petitioner and submits that the opposite parties  have already cross-examined  the complainant on the lacunas which appears in the complaint to which the complainant/petitioner has replied in its affidavit of reply.

The benefit already accrued in favour of the opposite parties by cross examining the complainant cannot be taken away at this stage by allowing the complainant/ petitioner to rectify the inherent defect in filing of the complaint.

On scrutiny of the record of CC/168/2021, I find that the evidence of the complainant/petitioner has already been closed and some of the inherent defect in complaint existence of which one since lodging of the case were pointed out and cross-examined by the opposite parties to which the complainant/petitioner had replied.

Therefore, if any benefit is accrued by the opposite parties by way of cross examination cannot be taken away at this stage.

On further scrutiny of the complaint application the following lacuna since lodging of the complaint are found :-

• The complaint petition has been filed on 23.07.2021.
• The name of the complainant is ‘Namaste Management Pvt. Ltd.
• The complaint petition does not bear the signature of the Director or authorized representative of the Complainant except on the last page.
• At the time of lodging the Complaint Case no authorization document submitted in favour of the person who signed on the last page of the Complaint, Affidavit and Verification annexed thereto.
• The complaint application is not supported by any affidavit.
• The person signed on the page captioned ‘Affidavit’ is not identified by any Advocate neither the person affirmed any oath before the Notary. Though Notarial Seal is affixed but it has not been certified or signed by the Notary.
• The page captioned ‘Verification’ bears the seal, certificate and signature of the notary.

So, the prayer for leave to file supplementary affidavit annexing Board Resolution dated 17.05.2021 cannot be allowed and liable to be rejected.

Hence, it is

O R D E R E D

that the Misc. Application be and the same is dismissed on contest with cost of Rs.1,000/-.