No. 7/12.06.2009

HON’BLE JUSTICE SRI A. CHAKRABARTI, PRESIDENT.

Appellant through Mr. Souryaditya Banerjee, the Ld. Advocate and Respondent through Mr. Arup Kr. Das, the Ld. Advocate are present.  Heard the Ld. Advocate for the Appellant as also Mr. Das, the Ld. Advocate for the Respondent.  It appears that the subject property was sold by the present Complainant to a third party.  It is true, as argued by Mr. Das, that the purchaser could have brought him as Complainant by addition of his name as a party Complainant.  Incidentally instead of taking the said course application was filed for withdrawal of the proceeding with liberty to file fresh complaint on same cause of action.  By the impugned order the said liberty has not been granted.  It is true that the Civil Procedure Code does not apply in the case before the Forum but in the interest of justice the summary proceeding before a Forum should be closed without taking a decision on merit only on technical grounds.  Therefore, we are of the opinion that liberty should be granted to the Complainant and/or third party purchaser to file a complaint on the same cause of action.  With the above liberty we allow the appeal and the impugned order is set aside.  We make it clear that in case the purchaser does not become a Complainant in the main proceeding the legal consequences has not been decided by us.