HON’BLE MR. TARAPADA GANGOPADHYAY, MEMBER

These Revisions bearing Nos. RP/177/2016, RP/178/2016, RP/179/2016, RP/180/2016 and RP/181/2016  u/s 17(1)(b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 have been filed by the identical OPs assailing the order No. 12 dated 18.8.2016 passed by the Ld. District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Kolkata, Unit-I in Complaint Case Nos. CC/14/718, CC/14/719, CC/14/729, CC/14/730 and CC/14/731 respectively fixing a date for final hearing of the Complaint Cases concerned skipping the stages for filing evidence, questionnaire and replies thereto by the parties concerned.  Aggrieved by the said orders the OPs have preferred the instant Revisions.

The facts of the said Revision Cases as well as the Revisionists being identical, the aforesaid Revision Cases are being disposed of by this common order.

The Ld. Advocate for the Revisionists submits that the orders impugned were passed ignoring the settled procedure of trial of Consumer Cases and hence, the orders passed are not legally valid.

The Ld. Advocate continues that the orders impugned were passed ignoring the requirements of the provisions of the statute as laid down u/s 13(2)(b)(i) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, and that without considering that the evidence, questionnaires and replies thereto cannot be filed by the parties concerned at a time.

The Ld. Advocate adds that the Consumer Case, even being a case of summary trial, cannot be adjudicated without any evidence and exchange of interrogatories and replies thereto by the parties involved as per the standard procedure.

The Ld. Advocate finally concludes that in view of the aforesaid submission, the orders impugned should be set aside, the same being contrary to the settled principle of law and the case be remanded to the Ld. District Forum with direction to follow the settled trial procedure for disposal of the Complaint Cases.

On the other hand, the Ld. Advocate for the  Respondent/Complainant submits that the Ld. District Forum fixed the date of final hearing of the Complaint Cases being the cases of summary trial allowing opportunity to file evidence, interrogatories and replies ‘in the meantime’ and hence, there is no deviation of trial process of the Complaint Cases.

The Ld. Advocate for the Respondent/Complainant concludes that in view of the above submission, the instant Revisions should be dismissed.

Heard both the sides, considered their respective submission and perused the materials on records.

The orders impugned reveal that the Ld. District Forum passed the orders impugned fixing the final date of hearing bypassing the well-settled procedural stages of receiving evidence from the OP and/or cross-examination stage through exchange of interrogatories and replies thereto among the parties involved.  Receiving evidence as required u/s 13(2)(b)(i) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and cross examination through exchange of interrogatories and replies thereto among the parties involved, are the fundamental requirements of justice delivery system even in the case of summary trial.  But in the case on hand, the Ld. District Forum did not adopt the said procedure of justice delivery system before fixing the final date of hearing of the Complaint Cases.

The aforesaid facts, submission and observation lead to the conclusion that the orders impugned were not passed in compliance with the settled procedure of trial of the Complaint Cases under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

Consequently, the orders impugned deserve to be set aside and the cases be remanded to the Ld. District Forum for order afresh in compliance with the settled principle of trial of the Complaint Cases allowing the OP to file its evidence and the other side to exchange interrogatories and replies thereto before the stage of final hearing.

Accordingly, the Revisions are allowed.  The impugned orders are set aside.  The cases are remanded to the Ld. District Forum for order afresh.  Both the parties are directed to appear before the Ld. District Forum concerned on 22.5.2017.

This judgment and order will govern the Revision Petition Nos. RP/177/2016, RP/178/2016, RP/179/2016, RP/180/2016 and RP/181/2016.