Sri Utpal Kumar Bhattacharya, Member
Ld. Advocates appearing on behalf of the Revisionist and OP/Respondent No.2 are present.
Instant Revision petition challenges the interim order dated 08/02/2017 passed by the Ld. District Forum in Complaint Case No. 213 of 2016 disallowing the prayer of the OP No.1 for filing the WV because of the expiry of the statutory period for filing the same and ordering, at the same time, the complaint case to be run ex-parte against the OP No.1.
Heard Ld. Advocate appearing on behalf of the Revisionist who prayed for setting aside the order of ex-parte hearing passed by the Ld. District Forum against the Revisionist/OP No.1. As contended, there was merit in the case in favour of the Revisionist/OP No. 1 and accordingly the case should be heard and disposed of on merit offering the participating sides due opportunity of being heard.
The Ld. Advocate, in this context, referred to the decision of the Hon’ble National Commission in First Appeal No. 774 of 2016 [Kamala Roy choudhury and ors—Vs—Subrata Das and ors] reported in 2017(2)CPR402(NC) wherein, while allowing the Appellants to file their written version before the State Commission subject to payment of total cost of Rs.20,000/-to both complainants, the Hon’ble National Commission observed that it would be open to the concerned Forum to accept written statement filed beyond stipulated time of 45 days.
Ld. Advocate appearing on behalf of the OP /Respondent No.2 did not submit any thing.
Perused the papers on record. It appeared from the orders dated 18/01/2017 that notices were served upon the Revisionist/OP No.1 on 23/12/2016. That means 08/02/2017, being the date of the impugned order, was the 45th day since the day of receiving the notice by the Respondent/OP No.1. Since the submission of the WV exceeding the period of 45 days—inclusive the extended period of 15 days—is not permissible as per provision envisaged u/s 13(1)(a) of the C P Act, 1986, the Ld. District Forum appears to have made no mistake in passing the impugned order not going beyond the statutory provision.
Still, as we feel, the dispute, on all occasions, should be disposed of on merit and as it is now a settled principle of law in view of the decision of the Hon’ble National Commission in F A No.774 of 2016 reported in 2017(2)CPR402(NC) supra that the Consumer Forum has the authority to accept written version beyond the stipulated period of 45 days, we are inclined to allow the Revisionist/OP No. 1 to file the WV before the Ld. District Forum subject to payment of cost of Rs. 20,000/-to the Consumer Welfare Fund of the Ld. District Forum.
Hence,
ordered
that the Revision Petition be and the same is allowed. The Revisionist/OP No. 1 shall file the W V before the Ld. District Forum on 20-04-2018 positively subject to payment of cost of Rs.20,000/-to the Consumer Welfare Fund of the Ld. District Forum. Parties are hereby directed to report to the Ld. District Forum on the above mentioned date.
