9.....30.11.2021....
The Ld. Advocate for the petitioner / O.P. No.6 is present. None appears on behalf of the complainants / O.Ps. The M.A. is taken up for hearing. The Ld. Advocate for the petitioner submits that the petitioner / O.P. No.6 is an unnecessary party and the complainants/OPs have made allegations against the petitioner / O.P. No.6 in Para – 5 and Para-13 of the written complaint. It is urged that Ms. Green Haven Realty Pvt. Ltd. is not a member of the Ptr/O.P. No.6 and the Ptr/ O.P. No.6 is not received any complaint from the O.Ps. / complainants as alleged in Para-13 of the complaint. It is contended that the case is not maintainable against the petitioner / O.P. No.6.
Perused the M.A . and considered the submission of the Ld. Advocate for the petitioner. On a careful consideration, we find that the complainants have some allegations against the petitioner / O.P. No.6 as stated in Para 5 and Para – 13 of the complaint. It is not wise to decide without allowing the complainants / O.Ps. to file evidence that the allegations against the petitioner / O.P. No.6 are genuine or false. In out considered opinion, the question of maintainability of complaint in respect of O.P. No.6 may be decided after taking evidence from both sides. MA is thus dismissed exparte against the Ops. The petitioner / O.P. No.6 is at liberty to rise the point of maintainability at the time of final hearing.
It appears from the record that notice upon O.P. No.4 has been served. But none appears on behalf of O.P. No.4. O.P. No.6 has already filed W.V. No S.R. is received upon the O.P. Nos. 1, 2 3 & 5. The complainant is to take fresh steps for causing service of notice upon the O.P. No.1, 2 3 & 5 at their own cost by speed post / Registered Post with AD fixing 10.01.2022 for S.R. upon O.P. Nos. 1,2,3 and 5 and further order
No comments:
Post a Comment