West Bengal

Cooch Behar

CC/56/2016

Sri Swapan Das, - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Registrar, U B K V, - Opp.Party(s)

Mr. Debasish Biswas

30 Mar 2017

ORDER

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum
B. S. Road, Cooch Behar
Ph. No.230696, 222023
 
Complaint Case No. CC/56/2016
 
1. Sri Swapan Das,
S/o. Late Promod Das, Dhaloguri, P.S. Kotwali, Dist. Cooch Behar.
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. The Registrar, U B K V,
Pundibari, Cooch Behar.
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
  Sri Gurupada Mondal PRESIDENT
  Smt.Runa Ganguly Member
  Debangshu Bhattacharjee MEMBER
 
For the Complainant:Mr. Debasish Biswas, Advocate
For the Opp. Party: Mr. Nitai Ch. Dey, Advocate
Dated : 30 Mar 2017
Final Order / Judgement

Date of Filing: 24-05-2016                                                      Date of Final Order: 30-03-2017

Sri Gurupada Mondal, President.         

Order No.13, dated 30/03/2017.

             Today is fixed for passing necessary order.

             Both parties file hazirahs. The case record is taken up for order.

          The O.P files a petition stating that the instant complaint is not maintainable on the ground that the present Complainant filed a complaint case being No. 86/2015 over the self same cause of action and that case was dismissed for default on 15/12/2015. The Complainant did not file any Revisional Application before the proper Forum, instead the Complainant has filed this case, which is at all tenable in law. This case is barred by the principal of Res-judicata and prays for dismissal of this case.

            On the other hand, the Complainant has filed w/o denying all material allegations.  Specific case of the Complainant is that the OP has already filed w/v and at this stage, the OP cannot raise such point and prays for dismissal of the petition.

Points For Consideration

             Is the O.P/Complainant is entitled to get an order as prayed for?

Decision With Reasons

          During hearing, Ld. Agent for the O.P submits that the question of law can be raised at any time of the proceeding. Neither the Complainant nor the O.P files any document to show that the case being No. CC/86/2015 was dismissed for default. The Complainant during hearing admits that his previous case was dismissed for default. Admitted fact is that the Complainant’s previous case being No. CC/86/2015 was dismissed for default. The Complainant, instead of revive the said case by filing a petition u/or.9, Rule 4 or Rule 9 CPC before the proper Forum, has filed this case for proper relief. In fact, this subsequent case is not maintainable in law.

Hence,

            Ordered,

                    That the petition dated 09/01/2017 is hereby allowed on contest. The case is dismissed accordingly. There is no order as to cost.

       Let plain copy of this Final Order be made available and be supplied free of cost to the concerned party/Ld. Advocate by hand/Registered Post with A/D forthwith for information and necessary action, as per Rules.

 
 
[ Sri Gurupada Mondal]
PRESIDENT
 
[ Smt.Runa Ganguly]
Member
 
[ Debangshu Bhattacharjee]
MEMBER

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.