Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Tapas Dutta vs National Consumer Dispute Redressal ... on 16 August, 2019
Author: Debangsu Basak
Bench: Debangsu Basak
1
2 16.08. W.P. No.2648(W) of 2019
ns 2019
Tapas Dutta.
Versus
National Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission &
Ors.
Mr. Rajdeep Bhattacharya,
Mr. Mritunjoy Halder ... for the petitioner.
Re: CAN 7887 of 2019
This is an application for appropriate order.
The writ petition was disposed of by an order
dated February 8, 2019. An appeal was carried
therefrom. The order dated February 2, 2019 was set
aside and the matter was remanded for fresh hearing.
Affidavit-of-service filed in Court today be
taken on record.
None appears for the respondents.
Learned Advocate appearing for the applicant / petitioner relies upon (2019) 6 Supreme Court Cases 424 (Karnataka Housing Board Versus K. A. Nagamani) and submits that, the issues raised in the writ petition stands decided by the Hon'ble Supreme 2 Court.
The respondents were represented on February 8, 2019 when the order of disposal of the writ petition was passed. The respondents were represented before the Appeal Court also.
The affidavit-of-service and the subsequent notice do not establish that, all the respondents and particularly, the learned Advocates appearing for the respondents before the Trial Court as also the Appeal Court were served with the notice of application.
Before the order of remand, the writ petition was disposed of without inviting affidavits. On remand it would be appropriate to afford an opportunity to file affidavits to the parties. Presence of the respondents is material to pass an effective order. In such circumstances, the application will go for the present moment to facilitate the applicant to serve the respondents.
Urgent certified website copies of this order, if applied for, be made available to the parties upon compliance of the requisite formalities. 3 ( Debangsu Basak, J. )