No. 4/23.11.2009.

HON’BLE JUSTICE SRI A. CHAKRABARTI, PRESIDENT.

Revision Petitioner through Mr. Nitindra Mohan Mukherjee, the Ld. Advocate and O.P. through Miss S. Roychowdhury, the Ld. Advocate are present.  This revision application was filed by the O.P. in the Forum below challenging the order allowing amendment of the complaint.  The copy of the application for amendment filed by the Complainant seeks amendment as follows :

          “Schedule of proposed Amendment

1.       At page 2 in paragraph no.6 on the 1^st line of the complaint application after the words “That the Opposite Party in the instant case is also responsible for not” the following words are to be inserted -

          “supplying the completion certificate issued by the Kolkata Municipal Corporation and”

2.       At page 3 in the prayer portion in clause (2) on the 2^nd line after the words “be directed” the following words are to be inserted -

          “to supply the copy of the completion certificate and”

While revision application was being heard for consideration of the scope and merit of the impugned order regarding the said amendment, today Miss Roychowdhury, the Ld. Advocate appearing for the O.P. produces a copy of the communication by Kolkata Municipal Corporation intimating issuance of Completion Certificate by communication dated 15.10.2009.  Mr. Mukherjee appearing for the Revisionist does not dispute the present document.

In the circumstances Miss Roychowdhury states that Completion Certificate having been already issued the amendment sought by her client before the Forum below has lost its relevance and the amendment is no more required.

Mr. Mukherjee appearing for the Revisionist has no contention in respect of such submission by the O.P. who is the Complainant before the Forum and is the Applicant in the application for amendment.

In the above circumstances we find that Completion Certificate have already been issued the only incorporation prayed for by the said amendment relating to supply of Completion Certificate, does not require any further incorporation of the said amendment.

Therefore, prayer made by Miss Roychowdhury for not pressing the amendment application is considered and allowed and we hereby set aside the impugned order and also dismiss application for amendment as not pressed as prayed for by Miss Roychowdhury on instruction.  Accordingly the revision stands allowed.  We make it clear that we have not decided any of the points on merit in the proceeding before the Forum below.