Sri Shyamal Gupta, Member

Challenging the Order dated 08-01-2019, passed by the Ld. District Forum, Kolkata-II (Central) in CC/457/2016, this Revision is preferred.

It is the case of the Revisionist that, once BNA is filed, the Ld. District Forum cannot accord any liberty to any of the contesting parties to undo an error crept in the document filed earlier.  Accordingly, she prayed for setting aside the impugned order.

Both sides were heard and documents on record gone through.

It appears, by moving a petition, the Respondent No. 2 sought to amend a typographical error that inadvertently crept in its WV.  It is true that, the Respondent No. 2 ought to be extremely careful before submitting the WV.  That said, to err is human.  As the proposed amendment did not seek to make any material change or put the petitioner in any undue advantage, in our considered opinion, by allowing the petition, the Ld. District Forum committed no legal infirmity. 

In the interest of natural justice, it is always desirable that true facts are disclosed before the adjudicating Court of Law by the parties concerned. Adjudication cannot be made properly based on incorrect facts.

This beneficial legislation is intended at delivering expeditious justice to aggrieved consumers.  Against such backdrop, if the consumers themselves put unwarranted hindrance by disputing trifle matters, it is bound to defeat the very purpose of this legislation. 

District Forum being competent enough to allow correction of typographical error, needless to say, the impugned order was rightly passed by the Ld. District Forum.  Accordingly, any sort of interference from our end to the same is totally uncalled for. 

The Revision is, therefore, dismissed with a cost of Rs. 500/- being payable by the Revisionist to the Consumer Welfare Fund of the Ld. District Forum.

Revisionist to appear before the Ld. District Forum on 18-12-2019 for payment of cost.