Order no.2               Date:26.06.2023

Ld. Advocate for the petitioner/proforma opposite party no.5 is present.

Ld. Advocate for the opposite party nos. 1 and 2 is also present.

Ld. Advocate for the complainant is present and files written objection against the Misc. Application. Copy served.

Perused and considered the Misc. Application dated 22.05.2023 along with its written objection.

Heard both sides.

Ld. Advocate for the petitioner/proforma opposite party no.5 submits that the complainants have not prayed any relief against this petitioner in CC/331/2022. The proforma opposite party no.5 is neither necessary nor proper party to this case; as such the name of the proforma opposite party no.5 may be expunged in CC/331/2022.

Ld. Advocate for the complainants raised strong objection against the prayer  of the petitioner/proforma opposite party no.5 and submits that the complainant no.1 has an AMC contract with the proforma opposite party no.5 in respect of the CT scan machine in question. The complainant no.1 has duly utilised the AMC service from the proforma opposite party no.5 time to time and in return the proforma opposite party no.5 issued several reports with regard to the CT scan machine mentioned above.

For proper adjudication of the dispute between the parties the presence of proforma opposite party no.5 is required.

Considering the facts and nature of the complaint case no. CC/331/2022, the prayer of the petitioner/proforma opposite party no.5 cannot be allowed. Therefore the Misc. Application dated 22.05.2023 is dismissed without cost.