| Miscellaneous Application No. MA/337/2023 | | ( Date of Filing : 13 Oct 2023 ) | | In | | Complaint Case No. CC/207/2018 |
| | | | 1. Ashokejyoti Biswas | | FC-50, Salt Lake, Sector - 3, P.S.-Salt Lake(South), Kolkata - 700106, P.S.- Bidhan Nagar(South). | | 2. Rudrani Biswas | | FC-50, Salt Lake, Sector - 3, P.S.-Salt Lake(South), Kolkata - 700106, P.S.- Bidhan Nagar(South). |
| ...........Appellant(s) | |
| Versus | | 1. Tirtha Ghosh | | (Brother of Late Partha Ghosh), 17J, Rani Branch Road, Panchanantala, PC Ghosh Building, Paikpara, P.S. - Chitpore, Kolkata - 700002. | | 2. Jaya Ghosh | | (Mother of Late Partha Ghosh), 17J, Rani Branch Road, Panchanantala, PC Ghosh Building, Paikpara, P.S. - Chitpore, Kolkata - 700002. | | 3. Subrata Mukherjee, Partner of Better Off International | | R/11, MIG Housing, 25/3, Raja Manindra Road, P.S. - Tala, Kolkata - 700037. | | 4. Subrata Banerjee | | Manager & Consultant Of BETTER OFF INTERNATIONAL, C/O BETTER OFF INTERNATIONAL, P.S. - Chitpore. | | 5. Debasish Saha | | S/o Sisir Saha, 6/1, Umakanta Sen Lane, Kolkata-700030, Ghugudanga Outpost P.S. |
| ...........Respondent(s) |
|
|
| Final Order / Judgement | Order No. 2 Ld. Advocate for the complainants/petitioners is present. Ld. Advocate for the opposite party nos.1 and 2, Ld. Advocate for the opposite party no.3, Ld. Advocate for the opposite party no.4 and Ld. Advocate for the opposite party no.5 are present. Copy served upon all the opposite parties. Ld. Advocate for the opposite party no.3 and Ld. Advocate for the opposite party no.5 raised no objection against the prayer of the complainants/petitioners. Ld. Advocate for the opposite party nos.1 and 2 filed written objection. Ld. Advocate for the opposite party no.4 again submits that his client is not contacting with him, as such, he is unable to make any submission before the Commission today. Perused. Considered. Heard both side. Ld. Advocate for the opposite party nos.1 and 2 submits that evidence has already been closed and date was fixed for filing BNA and argument so evidence cannot be reopened. Ld. Advocate for the complainants/petitioners submits that inadvertently vital evidence has not been submitted in this case, which is required for proper adjudication of the disputes between the parties. For proper adjudication of the disputes between the parties prayer for adducing further evidence by the complainant on recall is allowed. Thus, Misc. application dated 13/10/2023 is disposed of. | |
