20.03.2015

MRIDULA ROY, MEMBER.

The instant Revisional Application is directed against the order being  No.14 dated 6.5.2014 passed by the Ld,District Forum south 24 paraganas in complaint case being  No.485  of 2013 rejecting the petition filled by the complainant praying for the time for filing questionnaire and fixing the date for argument.

Being aggrieved by the impugned  order the complainant has preferred this instant Revisional application stating, inter alia, that on 28.4.2014 learned Advocate of the complainant was served with a copy of evidence of affidavit by the O.P. and the date for cross examination was fixed thereafter . However at that period of time the complainant was not feeling well and a communication gap had cropped up between the complainant and her Ld. Advocate for which the Ld. advocate could not prepare the questionnaire for cross examination  of the O.P. and , therefore , prayed for time. The Ld. District Forum, however, vide the impugned order rejected the prayer and thus the right of the complainant to cross examine the O.P. has been denied.

The case of the complainant in brief is that the complainant filed the complaint case  being  No.485 of 2013 before the Ld. District Forum alleging unfair trade practice on the part of the O.P. Bank stating that she availed a loan of  Rs.1,35,000/- disbursed by the O.P. bank keeping some gold ornaments of the complainant as collateral security.  Accordingly, an agreement for loan was executed by and between the parties on 28.7.2012. The complainant, as per terms of the agreement, paid entire amount of interest but the O.P. refused to  release the said gold ornaments to the complainant. Hence the case.

The  O.P. Bank filed W.V. denying all material allegation levelled against it.

The complainant filed evidence on affidavit followed by cross examination by the O.P. in the form of questionnaire. Thereafter the o.p filed evidence on affidavit but the complainant could not file the questionnaire and prayed for time and her prayer was rejected.

It appears from the record that the impugned order runs as-

“complainant,  o.p are present.  complainant files petition praying for time to file questionnaire.

Hd. Complainant.objection raised.

Petition is rejected .

To date i.e. 15.5.2014 for argument .”

Heard both sides.

It is evident from the impugned order that the Learned District forum did not assign any reason  for rejection of the petition filed by the complainant. It is well settelled  law that every order should be well reasoned, but , in the instant impugned order no reason for rejection of the petition has been assigned.

Under such circumstances, we are of opinion that the Ld. District Forum committed material irregularity in passing the impugned order.

In the result , the revisional application succeeds.

Hence ORDERED,

That  the  revisional application being  No. RP 67 of 2014 is allowed on contest without cost. The impugned order is set aside.  The Ld. District Forum will give an opportunity to the Complainant to file questionnaire.

Both parties are directed to appear before the Ld. District Forum on 10.04.2015.