This case record is taken up for consideration for passing order in respect of the application filed by complainant on 8^th September, 2022 for granting opportunity to the complainant to file evidence on affidavit.  This matter has been contested by OP side by filing written objection.

The argument highlighted by the applicant/complainant side and by OP side has already been heard.

It is the main point of contention and argument of the complainant / applicant side that according to the provisions of Section 151 C.P.C and under Section 38(8) of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 this District Commission has inherent jurisdiction to allow the prayer of the complainant / applicant side.

On the other hand, Ld. Advocate for the OP side argued that the above noted application is not maintainable and so this M.A case is liable to be dismissed.

After going through the material of this case record it appears that the above noted application dated.08.09.2022 has been filed under Section 151 C.P.C and under Section 38(8) of C.P.Act, 2019, and the said petition is neither verified nor supported by affidavit.  Moreso the opportunity of filing evidence on affidavit has been recalled by this District Commission and this District Commission vide order dated.15.03.2021 has debarred the complainant from filing of the evidence on affidavit.  In view of this position if the above noted prayer of the complainant/applicant side is allowed, it would be amounted to review the own order of this District Commission.  Moreso the order dated 15.03.2021 which is passed by this District Commission is an appealable order.  So this District Commission at this stage cannot interfere the said order.

Considering all the above noted factors, this District Commission is of the view that this M.A case is not at all maintainable and so it is rejected / dismissed on contest.  No order is passed as to cost.