22.09.2016

MR. UTPAL KUMAR BHATTACHARYA, HON’BLE MEMBER.

               Instant Appeal under section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 has been filed by the Appellant/Complainant challenging the judgment and order dated 12/11/2014 passed by the Ld. District Forum, Nadia in C C No.82/2014 dismissing the complaint.

              Heard Ld. Advocates on behalf of both the parties.

              The Ld. Advocate appearing on behalf of the Appellant/Complainant submitted that the complaint case before the Ld. District Forum has been dismissed for default as the Appellant/Complainant could not appear on three successive dates of hearing before the Ld. District Forum.

              It was submitted that since the date of first hearing the Appellant/Complainant did not have any lapse so far as the attendances on hearing dates are concerned but for the last three occasions when the Appellant/Complainant failed to attend the hearing before the Ld. District Forum.    The non-attendance on the said dates, as submitted, was unintentional as the same was due to certain miscommunications between the Appellant/Complainant and the Ld. Advocate appearing on behalf of him.

             The Ld. Advocate went on to submit further that his case has fair merit which can be established if he is given a chance for hearing.

            The Ld. Advocate prayed for setting aside the impugned order else, what he submitted, the interest of his client would be seriously prejudiced.

            Ld. Advocate appearing on behalf of the Respondent/OP submitted that the Ld. Advocate on behalf of the Appellant/Complainant used to remain absent on the dates of hearing before the Ld. District Forum. The impugned judgment and order was passed by the Ld. District Forum seeing the Appellant/Complainant reluctant to proceed with the complaint. Instant Appeal, as the Ld. Advocate continued, has been filed by the Appellant/Complainant only to make delay in disposal of the case.

          The Ld. Advocate submitted further that the Appellant/Complainant, in the instant Appeal, only prayed for the impugned order to be set aside as the complaint was not decided on merits.

          With the above submission, the Ld. Advocate prayed for the Appeal to be dismissed affirming the impugned judgment and order.

          Perused the papers on record. It appears to be a fact that the Ld. Advocate appearing on behalf of the Appellant/Complainant absented himself on three successive dates of hearing before the Ld. District Forum which he claims to be the fallout of a miscommunication between the Appellant/Complainant and the Ld. Advocate engaged by him. Prior to that, as it reveals from the record, there was no such major lapse on the part of the Appellant/complainant. Such being the circumstances, the reason as submitted by the Ld. Advocate appearing on behalf of the appellant/Complainant to substantiate the cause of non-attendance of the Appellant/Complainant before the Ld. District Forum seems to be convincing.

             In the light of the above, we are of considered view that the Appellant/Complainant should be given the opportunity of being heard to establish his case in the interest of justice.

            Hence, ordered that the Appeal is allowed. The impugned judgment and order is set aside. The complaint case is remanded to the Ld. District Forum with the direction to hear the case afresh on merit and pass a reasoned order.

           Both the parties are directed to appear before the Ld. District Forum on 25/10/2016.