West Bengal

StateCommission

FA/303/2009

M/S. Hall Mark Travel Wings - Complainant(s)

Versus

Sri Sasanka Kr. Ghosal - Opp.Party(s)

Swapan Kumar Mandal.

25 Apr 2011

ORDER


STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION , WEST BENGALBHAWANI BHAWAN (Gr. Floor), 31 Belvedere Road. Kolkata -700027
APPEAL NO. 303 of 2009
1. M/S. Hall Mark Travel Wings309, Bipin Behari Ganguly Street, 1st floor, Room no.15, Kolkata-700 012, Rep. by its prop. Smt.Anjali Bose, W/o. Late Bhupendra Nath BoseWest Bengal ...........Appellant(s)

Vs.
1. Sri Sasanka Kr. Ghosal6 & 8, Pankajini Chatterjee Road, Kolkata-700 033, P.S.- Charu MarketWest Bengal ...........Respondent(s)


For the Appellant :Swapan Kumar Mandal. , Advocate for
For the Respondent : Md. Ansar Ali. Mr. Liyakat Ali. , Advocate

Dated : 16 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. 8/16.12.2009.

 

HON’BLE JUSTICE SRI A. CHAKRABARTI, PRESIDENT.

 

Appellant through Mr. Swapan Kumar Mondal, the Ld. Advocate and Respondent through Md. Ansar Ali, the Ld. Advocate are present.  Heard the Ld. Advocate for the Appellant as also the Ld. Advocate for the Respondent.  It appears that the impugned judgement was passed ex parte as the O.P. did not appear.  The grievance of the O.P. – Appellant as argued by the Ld. Advocate for the Appellant is that the O.P. – Appellant was never served with any notice.  We have perused the LCR which contains the A/D Card apparently correctly bear the name and address of the O.P. – Appellant and it also shows the receipt of the same by one “R. Talukder”.  Though the Appellant has challenged the said service but surprisingly no case has been made out that the O.P. – Appellant does not have any employee or representative named “R. Talukder”.  The Ld. Advocate for the Respondent though produced other A/D Cards sent to the present O.P. – Appellant which were also received by one R. Talukder but as the same are not on record filed before the Forum we are unable to consider the same.

 

In the aforesaid circumstances as it appears that the O.P. – Appellant has not made out any appropriate case that the recipient of the said letter R. Talukder is not a staff or representative of the O.P. – Appellant at the relevant point of time, contention of the Appellant is found not acceptable.  The appeal, therefore, fails as no argument has been advanced.  The impugned judgement is affirmed.  No order as to costs. 

 

LCR be sent down to the Forum below along with a copy of this order forthwith.

 


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