10.02.2017
MR. UTPAL KUMAR BHATTACHARYA, HON’BLE MEMBER.
Instant revision petition has been filed by the Revisionist/O.P. under Section 17(1)(b) of the C. P. Act, 1986 challenging the order No. 26 dated 15.04.2016 passed by the Ld. District Forum, Kolkata, Unit – I allowing the prayer for amendment of the complaint dated 11.09.2012 sought for by the Complainant through his petition dated 28.05.2015 on the ground that the proposed amendments would not change the nature and character of the original complaint dated 11.09.2012.
Heard the Ld. Advocate appearing on behalf of the Revisionist/O.P. and Respondent/Complainant in person.
The Ld. Advocate appearing on behalf of the Revisionist/O.P. submitted that the interest of the Revisionist/O.P. was seriously prejudiced by the impugned order of the Ld. District Forum.
The Ld. Advocate contended that the Ld. District Forum, by the impugned order, allowed the complaint to be revised by the Respondent/Complainant who, taking advantage of the order, modified the original complaint to the extent of 24 paragraphs increasing the volume of the revised complaint more than double of the 11 paragraph-complaint originally filed by the Respondent/Complainant.
Such immense modification of the complaint, as the Ld. Advocate maintained, had changed the nature and character of the complaint which, under no circumstances, should be entertained and accordingly, the impugned order should be set aside.
The Respondent/Complainant, on the other hand, submitted that the Ld. District Forum passed the impugned order in full appreciation of the merit of the complaint. He claimed that the revision petition had not, in any way, changed the nature and character of the complaint as the facts of the case were kept unaltered in the revised complaint.
He, however, submitted that he had no objection if the complaint case was decided by the Ld. District Forum on the basis of the original complaint dated 11.09.2012.
Perused the papers on record. The facts of the case, in brief, as it appears on perusal of both the original and revised complaint, related to the grievance of the Respondent/Complainant against the non-delivery of possession and non-execution and non-registration of the deed of conveyance in respect of the subject land by the Revisionist/O.P. in spite of payment of consideration being made by the Respondent/Complainant in terms of agreement in time and in spite of the Revisionist /O.P. being requested repeatedly by the Respondent/Complainant for delivery of possession of the subject land and execution and registration of the Deed of Conveyance. Therefore, the facts of the case described in both the petitions did not bear any wide difference.
But, the prayer portion of both the petitions, however, had differences. In the original complaint dated 11.09.2012, the Respondent/Complainant prayed for an order to be passed against the Reviosionist/O.P. with the directions as under :-
- Registration and transfer of the land in question in favour of the Respondent/Complainant.
- Refund of Rs.96,000/-, the cost paid for delivery of the land to the Respondent/Complainant as the subject plot of land was not developed.
- Pay a compensation of Rs.2,50,000/- for causing inconveniences, distresses and grievances.
In the revised complaint, however, the prayer for the claim of refund of Rs.96,000/- being the cost paid for development of the subject land is seen to have been substituted by the prayer of an order towards Revisionist/O.P’s apologizing for the deficiency in service rendered by him to the Respondent/Complainant.
With the changes in prayer as aforesaid, the relief, as prayed for in the revised complaint, was reduced considerably in terms of the money value. Here actually the nature and character of the original complaint changed.
Such being the circumstances, we are of the considered view that the nature and character of the complaint has been changed in the revised complaint.
Hence, ordered, that the revision petition is allowed on contest setting aside the impugned judgment and order. The Ld. District Forum shall proceed on the basis of the complaint initially filed. Both the parties are directed to appear before the Ld. District Forum on 28.02.2017. The Revision Petition is thus disposed of. No order as to costs.
