Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission

M/S. Nicco Uco Alliance Credit Ltd. Rep. ... vs Sri Biswanath Biswas on 4 February, 2019

  	 Cause Title/Judgement-Entry 	    	       STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION  WEST BENGAL  11A, Mirza Ghalib Street, Kolkata - 700087             First Appeal No. A/1025/2015  ( Date of Filing : 16 Sep 2015 )  (Arisen out of Order Dated 19/08/2015 in Case No. CC/468/2008 of District Kolkata-II(Central))             1. M/s. Nicco Uco Alliance Credit Ltd. Rep. by, its authorized signatory Sri Gyan Prakash Pathak.  Nicco House, 2nd Floor, 2, Hare Street, P.S - Hare Street, Kolkata - 700 001. ...........Appellant(s)   Versus      1. Sri Biswanath Biswas   P - 63, Shibtola (Bilkanda), P.O - Natagarh, Dist - North 24 Pgs, West Bengal. ...........Respondent(s)       	    BEFORE:      HON'BLE MR. SHYAMAL GUPTA PRESIDING MEMBER    HON'BLE MR. UTPAL KUMAR BHATTACHARYA MEMBER          For the Appellant: Ms. Mousumi Chakraborty. Sri Gyan Prakash Pathak- Authorised person. , Advocate    For the Respondent:  In-Person., Advocate     Dated : 04 Feb 2019    	     Final Order / Judgement    

 Sri Shyamal Gupta, Member

This Appeal is preferred against the Order dated 19-08-2015 of the Ld. District Forum, Kolkata-II (Central), passed in CC/468/2008, whereof the complaint case has been allowed.

The complaint case was filed by the Complainant alleging non-payment of maturity proceeds to the tune of Rs. 66,413/- by the OP in respect of several certificates held by him. 

On the other hand, the OP disputed such claim of the Complainant contending inter alia that in view of the order passed by the Hon'ble High Court, Calcutta in C.A. No. 850/2007, the Complainant had no right to initiate any proceeding against it.  Accordingly, it prayed for dismissal of the complaint case.

Decision with reasons Heard both sides and gone through the documents on record.

It appears that, earlier this Appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution against which R.P. No. 3275/2016 was preferred before the Hon'ble National Commission and the said petition was disposed of by the Hon'ble Commission on 16-07-2018.  By such order, the Hon'ble Commission was pleased to impose a cost of Rs. 50,000/- upon the Appellant as a condition precedent to restore the Appeal. 

It appears that the Appellant has not paid a single farthing to the Respondent till date though the Hon'ble Commission granted two weeks time for payment of due cost to the Respondent. 

On due consideration of the disrespect being shown by the Appellant to abide by the order of the Apex Consumer Commission, we deem it appropriate dismiss the Appeal with cost.

Hence, O R D E R E D The Appeal stands dismissed on contest against the Respondent with a cost of Rs. 25,000/- being payable by the Appellant to the Respondent.        [HON'BLE MR. SHYAMAL GUPTA] PRESIDING MEMBER   [HON'BLE MR. UTPAL KUMAR BHATTACHARYA] MEMBER