West Bengal

StateCommission

FA/971/2013

Muthoot Finance Ltd. - Complainant(s)

Versus

Sri Tuhin Samanta - Opp.Party(s)

Mr. Sayak Ranjan Ganguly. Ms. Puja Sett.

06 Mar 2019

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
WEST BENGAL
11A, Mirza Ghalib Street, Kolkata - 700087
 
First Appeal No. FA/971/2013
( Date of Filing : 03 Sep 2013 )
(Arisen out of Order Dated 24/07/2013 in Case No. Complaint Case No. CC/173/2013 of District South 24 Parganas)
 
1. Muthoot Finance Ltd.
1/E, Diamond Harbour Road, Kolkata - 700 104, P.S. - Thakurpukur.
2. The Manager, Muthoot Finance Ltd.
1/E, Diamond Harbour Road, Kolkata - 700 104, P.S. - Thakurpukur.
...........Appellant(s)
Versus
1. Sri Tuhin Samanta
44/10, Jaydev Ghosh Road, Sarsuna Behala, P.S. Thakurpukur, Kolkata - 700 063.
...........Respondent(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. SHYAMAL GUPTA PRESIDING MEMBER
 HON'BLE MR. UTPAL KUMAR BHATTACHARYA MEMBER
 
For the Appellant:Mr. Sayak Ranjan Ganguly. Ms. Puja Sett. , Advocate
For the Respondent: Ms. Priyanka Das, Mr. Sibaji Sankar Dhar., Advocate
Dated : 06 Mar 2019
Final Order / Judgement

Sri Shyamal Gupta, Member

Through this Appeal, the correctness of the Order dated 24-07-2013, passed in CC/173/2013 has been questioned by M/s Muthoot Finance Ltd.

Short case of the Appellants is that it came to know about initiation of the complaint case on 10-06-2013, just one day before the scheduled date of their appearance before the Ld. District Forum. Anyway, on that day, their Ld. Advocate appeared and prayed for time to file WV and accordingly, the next date was fixed on 25-06-2013 for filing WV.  On that day, no step could be taken due to Bar resolution.  Then the Ld. District Forum fixed the next day on 10-07-2013 for filing WV.  As their Ld. Advocate was out of station to attend the marriage ceremony of his son, no step could be taken on that day too.  After returning from his hometown, the Ld. Advocate came to know that the matter was fixed for ex parte hearing.  Feeling aggrieved, this Appeal is filed.

Initially the Respondent appeared through his Ld. Advocate.  However, as no one turned up on behalf of the Respondents subsequently, at the time of hearing, submission of Ld. Advocate for the Appellants was heard.

It transpires from the confonet website that vide order dated 25-06-2017, the Ld. District Forum fixed the next date on 10-07-2013 for filing WV as a last chance.  However, on that day, i.e., 10-07-2013, taking due note of the fact that the Appellants did not file WV, it fixed the next date on 17-07-2013 for hearing and argument although, as per procedure, the next date was supposed to be fixed for filing evidence by the Respondent.  It shows that due procedure was not followed by the Ld. District Forum while adjudicating the instant complaint case. 

Considering all aspects, therefore, we deem it appropriate to remand the case to the Ld. District Forum for fresh adjudication of the case on merit after accepting the WV of the Appellants and following due procedure in accordance with law.

The Appeal, accordingly, succeeds in part.

Hence,

O R D E R E D

The Appeal stands allowed ex parte against the Respondent in part.  The impugned order is hereby set aside.  Parties to appear before the Ld. District Forum on 08-04-2019 for submission of WV by the Appellants positively.

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. SHYAMAL GUPTA]
PRESIDING MEMBER
 
[HON'BLE MR. UTPAL KUMAR BHATTACHARYA]
MEMBER

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.