The MA/58/2023 filed by OP no. 1 claiming that the agent or representative of the complainant should not be allowed to represent the complainant, mainly on the ground that the complainant engaged an Advocate on 14.02.2022 by signing Vokalatnama and then the said Advocate appeared for the complainant on 25.02.2022, 04.03.2022 and 25.04.2022. Thereafter as alleged, Mr. Kunal Saha entered appearance on 23.04.2022 and Mr. Ashok Roy, another agent appeared on 02.05.2022. It means that on 02.05.2022 the agent as well as the Advocate of the complainant both appear. But no objection was raised by the Ld. Advocate of OP no. 1 on that day. Otherwise, any one of them could have been dissuaded from entering appearance.

The A/R can represent a party in a consumer case as per Section 3(4) of the NCDRC notification dated 24.07.2020. When the complainant has engaged two agents namely Mr. Kunal Saha and Mr. Ashok Roy, he is not permitted to represent through Advocate.

The MA/58/2023 is thus disposed of with clarification that the complainant would not be permitted to represent himself through an Advocate of his choice during the subsistence of the appointment of the agent, in this case.

With the aforesaid direction the MA/58/2023 is thus disposed of.

As such, 02.05.2023 is fixed for bringing order from the Hon’ble SCDRC.