Today is fixed for hearing the revisional application on merit. The revisionist West Bengal Khadi and Village industries Board is being represented through Ld. Advocate C Chakraborty. The revision is contested by Central bank of India. Respondent no. 2 of this revision through Ld. Advocate P.K. Sikdar. The Central bank of India also submits the written objection against the revisional application. The respondent no. 1 S Agarwal who happens to be the consumer complainant, does not appear to contest the case. Accordingly the revision is heard in presence of Ld. Advocate of the revisionist and respondent no. 2. The case in our hand, in nut shell is that the complainant S Agarwal has registered the consumer compliant under Section 12 of CP Act, 1986 against the Central bank of India and West Bengal Khadi and Village industries Board. The revisionists/Op no. 2 West Bengal Khadi and Village industries Board could not secure the appearance before the Ld. Forum on 9/8/2018. Ld. Forum was then decided to hear the consumer complaint case ex-parte against the revisionists.

Being aggrieved with this order, this revision follows on the ground that the notice of the consumer complaint was received by an unauthorised person on behalf of West Bengal Khadi and Village industries Board, for which the revisionist could not aware about the existence of the consumer compliant and for that reason, Board was remained unrepresented before the Ld. Forum and Ld. Forum finding no other alternative, was pleased to fixe the case for ex-parte hearing without giving proper and adequate opportunity to the revisionists to contest the case for which the revisionists interest has  seriously affected and they have prejudiced for the order passed by the Ld. forum to hear the case ex-parte and for that reason, the revisionists has prayed for set aside of the order dated 9/8/2018 delivered by Ld. DCDRF, Siliguri. The consumer complainant S Agarwal and Central Bank of India as respondent no. 1 and 2 has received the notice of revision but respondent no.1  did not contest the case.

Decision with reason,

Ld. Advocate of respondent No 2 by filing written objection against the revisional application during the course of argument mentioned that the revisionist has mentioned in their revision application that notice delivered upon an unknown person who was not authorised to receive the notice of consumer compliant on behalf of revisionist and for that reason, they could not appear before the Ld. forum but the revisionist could not mention as to which way they came to know about the existence of consumer compliant case or about the order of the said case for which they have preferred the revision.

He further submits that there was tremendous delay on the part of the revisionists and for that reason, the revisional application should be dismissed. Ld. Advocate of the revisionist courtered this argument by mentioning before this Commission that if the revisionist dose not get any chance to contest the consumer compliant case then the purpose of fair justice would be seriously frustrated and if the revision is allowed then the revisionists would get  a chance to contest the consumer complainant case for the ends of justice.

After hearing the both sides, this Commission finds that the instant consumer compliant is still pending before the ld. Forum and there is a chance to give the opportunity to the revisionist to contest the case by filing the W.V and if such opportunity is provided to the revisionist, the purpose of justice would prevail.

Accordingly the revisional application is hereby succeeds.

Hence, it is,

Ordered,

That the revisional application is allowed on contest against respondent no. 2 and ex-parte against respondent no. 1. The order of Ld. DCDRF, Siliguri dated 9/8/2018 in reference to consumer case no. 40/S/2018 is hereby set aside. The revisionist West Bengal Khadi and Village industries Board is hereby asked to submit the WV positively before the Ld. DCDRF, Siliguri within a month from this date and the Ld. Forum shall adjudicate the consumer dispute as per provisions of law as soon as possible. The interim order of stay, if any stands vacated.

Let the order be supplied to the parties free of cost and also to be sent to Ld. DCDRF, Siliguri.