Before the Hon’ble State Consumer
Disputes Redressal Commission, West Bengal
IA
no. of 2019
C.C. Case No.208 of
2018
In the matter of :
Hshieh Sui Ying, Son of Hsieh Ying Hsing, residing
at 54C, Matheswartala Road, Police Station – Pragati Maidan, Kolkata – 700 046.
___________Complainant
-
Versus –
1.
M/s. S.K.S.
Developer, aproprietorship concern of Shri Sujit Saha, Son of Late Amar Chandra
Saha, having his office at E185, Ramgarh, Police Station – Patuli, Kolkata –
700 047.
2.
Shri Dipak Kar, Son
of Late Jagadish Chandra Kar, residing at CF-329, Sector – I, Bidhan Nagar,
Police Station – Bidhan Nagar, Kolkata – 700 064.
__________Opposite Parties
AND
In
the matter of :
Shri Dipak Kar, Son of Late Jagadish Chandra Kar,
residing at CF-329, Sector – I, Bidhan Nagar, Police Station – Bidhan Nagar,
Kolkata – 700 064
__________Applicant
/ Opposite Party number 2.
An
application for removal of the O.P. no. 2 and or to expunge the name of the
O.P. no.2, in the present Consumer Proceeding being CC/208 / 2018.
The humble petition on behalf of the opposite party No. 2, namely Sri Dipak Kar most
respectfully ;
Sheweth
as under :
1. That
this opposite party is in receipt of the notice served by the Hon’ble State
Commission, and therefore this opposite party accordingly appear in the present
consumer proceeding and consequently submitted written version and there after
subsequently he is in receipt of evidence on affidavit by the complainant.
2. That
this opposite party beg to states that the content and purport of the petition
of complaint and the content and purport of the evidence on affidavit by the
complainant are all the same and replica to each other. This opposite party do
not find any story against him. Further this opposite party do not find his
involvement into the story of complainant and the opposite party No.1.
3. That
this opposite party No.1 beg to states that this opposite party astonished how
the complainant made him a party to the present proceeding, since there is no
privity of contract either with the complainant or with the opposite party
No.1. Therefore the present consumer proceeding is suffered with misjoinder of
the party and this opposite party become victim at the instance of the
complainant.
4. That
this opposite party beg to states that there is no piece of document to show
that there is any contract either with the complainant or with the opposite
party No. 1 and therefore the present consumer proceeding is a frivolous one
against this opposite party and thus required to be dismissed in term of
provision section 26 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986.
5. That
this opposite party beg to states that this opposite party did never enter into
any nature of agreement either with the opposite party No.1 or with the
complainant and further this opposite party did never execute any instrument or
indenture in favour of opposite party No.1 of the complainant. This opposite
party even did never take any money either from the opposite party No.1 or from
the complainant.
6. That
this opposite party beg to states that in the entirety or proprietary of the
complaint as made by the complainant and the evidence on affidavit as submitted
by the complainant does not utter any story against this opposite party, which
clearly establish that there is no complaint against this opposite party either
in terms of the fact or in terms of the law and therefore this opposite party
is not a necessary party to the present consumer proceeding.
7. That
this opposite party beg to states that unless there is a privity of contract either
with the complainant or with the opposite party No.1. This opposite party
cannot lodged into the present consumer proceeding.
8. That
this opposite party beg to states that this opposite party in not a service
provider either to the complainant or to the opposite party No.1 herein.
Therefore this opposite party names must be struck down in the present consumer
proceeding, in the interest of administration of justice.
9. That
unless the name of the opposite party more particularly this opposite party be
removed in the present consumer preceding, this opposite party will highly
prejudice and suffer with irreparable
lose and injury.
10. That
this application is made bonafide in the interest of administration and
justice.
It is therefore prayed that your Lordship would graciously be pleased to
allow this application and to remove this opposite party in the present
Consumer proceeding, and to expunge the name of this opposite party in the
present consumer proceeding in the interest of administration of justice and or
to pass such other necessary order or orders as your Lordship may deem, fit, and
proper, for the end of justice.
And
for this act of kindness your petitioner as in duty bound shall ever pray.
Affidavit
I, Shri Dipak Kar, Son of Late
Jagadish Chandra kar, aged about ____years, by faith Hindu, by Occupation
______________, residing at premises being no.
– 2, Sector – I, Bidhan Nagar, Police Station – Bidhan Nagar, Kolkata –
700 064, do hereby solemnly declare and affirm as follows :
1.
That I am being the Opposite
Party no.2, in the present Consumer Proceeding CC/208/2018, before the Hon’ble
State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, West Bengal.
2.
That I am much
conversant with the material facts as described in the present Consumer
proceeding by the Complainant, therein.
3.
That the statements
contained in paragraph number ________ to ________ are true to the best of my
knowledge and belief, and the rests are my humble submissions before the
Hon’ble State Commission, W.B.
4.
The above statements
are true to the best of my knowledge and belief.
DEPONENT
Identified
by me,
Advocate
Prepared
in my Chamber,
Advocate
Date
: ______________2019.
Place
: Alipore, Kolkata.
N O T A R Y
No comments:
Post a Comment