West Bengal

StateCommission

FA/08/383

Sri Sabyasachi Lahiri. - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Director, M/s Duncans Industries Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Inperson.

11 Dec 2008

ORDER


STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION , WEST BENGAL
BHAWANI BHAWAN (Gr. Floor), 31 Belvedere Road. Kolkata -700027
APPEAL No. FA/08/383 of 2008

Sri Sabyasachi Lahiri.
Smt. Juthika Lahiri.
...........Appellant(s)

Vs.

The Director, M/s Duncans Industries Ltd.
...........Respondent(s)


BEFORE:
1. JUSTICE ALOKE CHAKRABARTI 2. MR. A K RAY

Complainant(s)/Appellant(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):


For the Appellant :


For the Respondent :




ORDER

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.

No. 4/11.12.2008.

 

HON’BLE JUSTICE SRI A. CHAKRABARTI, PRESIDENT.

 

This appeal was filed challenging the order dated 05.09.2008 passed by the District Consumer Redressal Forum Calcutta Unit – II in CC 392 of 2007 whereby the complaint was dismissed.  The case of the Complainant is that he had deposited various amounts with M/s. Duncun Industries Ltd. in fixed deposits and on his grievance that the Company did not pay quarterly interest as also principal amount on maturity the present complaint was filed for payment of the principal amount as also interest and other relief.

 

Impugned order shows the complaint was dismissed on sole ground that the Complainant did not file the Affidavit stating that no case has been filed by them before the Company Law Board regarding the said FDRs involved in the complaint.  On perusal of the complaint we find that the statement was made at Para 6 of the complaint that the Complainant had not filed any complaint before the Company Law Board for redressal of his claim.  It is true that the complaint was filed on verification and not supported by Affidavit and the Complainant did not file any Affidavit making the said statement before the Forum below.  Complainant produces an Affidavit to the aforesaid extent before this Commission at the time of hearing of the appeal but admittedly the said Affidavit was affirmed subsequent to the passing of the impugned order.

 

We are of the opinion that for such default in filing the Affidavit the complaint should not have been dismissed without granting the Complainant an opportunity to make the statement on Affidavit as required by the Forum below.  In above view of the matter the appeal is allowed and the impugned order is set aside.  The Forum below is directed to proceed with the matter in accordance with law and following indications given hereinabove.

 

A copy of this order be sent to the Forum below forthwith.

 




......................JUSTICE ALOKE CHAKRABARTI
......................MR. A K RAY