West Bengal

StateCommission

RP/28/2017

Smt. Shampa Shadhya - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Branch Manager, Uco Bank - Opp.Party(s)

Mr. Dipak Ranjan Mukherjee, Ms. Mousumi Chakraborty

03 Jan 2018

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
WEST BENGAL
11A, Mirza Ghalib Street, Kolkata - 700087
 
Revision Petition No. RP/28/2017
(Arisen out of Order Dated 02/02/2017 in Case No. cc/457/2016 of District Kolkata-II(Central))
 
1. Smt. Shampa Shadhya
W/o Lt. Tridib Shadhya, Suncity, Block-B, Flat no.1104, 105/1, Bidhannagar Main Road, P.S.- Ultadanga, Kolkata-700 067.
...........Appellant(s)
Versus
1. The Branch Manager, Uco Bank
Office at Ballygunge Circular Road Br., P.S. - Kareya, Kolkata -700 019.
2. The Sr. Manager, LIC
Office at KMDO -II, 23A/44X, Diamond Harbour Road, Kolkata - 700 053.
...........Respondent(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. SHYAMAL GUPTA PRESIDING MEMBER
 HON'BLE MR. UTPAL KUMAR BHATTACHARYA MEMBER
 
For the Petitioner:Mr. Dipak Ranjan Mukherjee, Ms. Mousumi Chakraborty, Advocate
For the Respondent: Kalyan Kumar Mukherjee., Advocate
 Mr. Surajit Auddy. Ms. Swapnalekha Auddy., Advocate
Dated : 03 Jan 2018
Final Order / Judgement

Sri Shyamal Gupta, Member

Present Revision is directed against the Order dated 02-02-2017 passed by the Ld. District Forum, Kolkata-II (Central) in C.C. No. 457/2016.

It is the case of the Revisionist that in respect of the complaint filed by her, the Ld. District Forum fixed 02-02-2017 for filing reply to the questionnaire put forth by the Respondents.  However, it being a declared holiday on the eve of Saraswati Puja in Calcutta High Court/City Civil Court area, no Notary Public was available for which her Ld. Advocate was compelled to go to Alipore Court for notarization purpose and by the time, it was made ready, the Ld. District Forum already fixed the next date for filing Evidence on Affidavit by the Respondents. Hence, this Revision is filed for setting aside the said order.

Heard the Ld. Advocates of the parties in the matter and perused the documents on record.

It appears that on 18-01-2017, the Respondents filed their questionnaire, when the next date was fixed on 02-02-2017 for filing reply to said questionnaire.  Thus, the Revisionist was accorded a fortnight’s time for this purpose which was sufficient time by any means.  It is not understood, as to why did the Revisionist not make it ready in all respects well in advance to avoid last minute rush.

Moreover, the situation did not arise out of the blue.  Therefore, there is no reason to believe that the Ld. Advocate of the Revisionist was not alive to the situation.  We, therefore, fail to understand why timely action was not taken to keep such eleventh hour situation at bay. While the Ld. District Forum was keen to expedite disposal of the case, it was incumbent upon the Revisionist to reciprocate through due compliance of the order of the Ld. District Forum.

The alibi as given by the Revisionist does not appear quite satisfactory to us. However, in the interests of justice, we are inclined to allow this Revision subject to deposit of a cost of Rs. 500/- with the Welfare Fund of the Ld. District Forum.

Hence,

O R D E R E D

The Revision stands allowed in part.  The impugned order is hereby set aside.  Revisionist is directed to appear before the Ld. District Forum on 05-02-2018 and deposit requisite cost and reply under affidavit.  

 
 
[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.