West Bengal

StateCommission

RC/138/2009

Smt. Juthika Guin. - Complainant(s)

Versus

Sri Ramesh Yadav. - Opp.Party(s)

Mr. Shyamal Kumar Bhattacharya.

17 Dec 2009

ORDER


STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION , WEST BENGALBHAWANI BHAWAN (Gr. Floor), 31 Belvedere Road. Kolkata -700027
RC No. 138 of 2009
1. Smt. Juthika Guin.D/O Late Amarendra Kumar Guin, 377, Mallick Lane, PO & PS. Chinsurah, Dist. Hooghly. Represented through her Constituted Attorney Sremoyee Guin, 377 Mallick Lane, PO & PS. Chinsurah, Dist. Hooghly. ...........Appellant(s)

Vs.
1. Sri Ramesh Yadav.S/O Sri Arjun Prosad Yadav. C/O Ram Equal Singh, Rampal Singh Bagan, Kolupukur, Chandannagar, PO & PS. Chandannagar, Dist. Hooghly, Presently residing at Amratala Gali, Chinsurah, PO & PS. Chinsurah, Dist. Hooghly, 2. M/s Saikat Construction, 13/8/D, Ariff Road. PS. Ultadanga, Kolkata- 700067. ...........Respondent(s)


For the Appellant :Mr. Shyamal Kumar Bhattacharya., Advocate for
For the Respondent :

Dated : 17 Dec 2009
ORDER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.

No. 1/17.12.2009.

 

HON’BLE JUSTICE SRI A. CHAKRABARTI, PRESIDENT.

 

Heard the Ld. Advocate for the Revision Petitioner.  It appears that Revisionist as O.P. No. 2 filed an application challenging the maintainability of the proceeding at the instance of the Complainant.  It appears that the Complainant has claimed in the complaint his right under an Agreement in respect of purchase of a flat constructed by O.P. No. 1.  As it appears prima facie that such question of maintainability can be decided only after entire evidence is recorded, we are of the opinion that the impugned order was passed rightly by the Forum below and there is no question of interference with the same.  In the circumstances the revision fails and is dismissed.  We make it clear that we have not expressed any opinion as regards maintainability of the complaint in the present order.

 


MR. A K RAY, MemberHON'BLE JUSTICE ALOKE CHAKRABARTI, PRESIDENTMRS. SILPI MAJUMDER, Member