Allowed

Srinivas Pradhan v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC18 Jan 2023WA/397/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This intra-court appeal challenged the Single Judge's refusal to issue notice for reconstructing misplaced consumer case records. The High Court, noting the records were unavailable and could be reconstructed from party documents, allowed the appeal and directed the District Commission to reconstruct the records within one month and conclude adjudication by May 31, 2023.

What did the court decide?

Directed the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Berhampur/Ganjam to reconstruct the case record from party documents within one month and the District Forum to conclude adjudication by M

Srinivas Pradhan Vs State of Odisha — Consumer Protection | Orissa HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

W.A. 397 of 2022

¶3

Srinivas Pradhan

¶4

…. Appellants

¶5

Mr. Supriyo Ranjan Mahapatra, Advocate

¶6

-versus-

¶7

State of Odisha & others

¶8

…. Respondents

¶9

Mr. P.K. Mohanty, ASC for O.P.Nos.1 to 4 Mr. Chittaranjan Swain, Advocate for O.P.No.5

¶10

CORAM: JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH

¶11

JUSTICE M.S.SAHOO

¶12

ORDER

¶13

18.01.2023 Hybrid Mode

¶14

Order No.

¶15

. 1 . The present Intra Court Appeal has been filed challenging the order dated 14.03.2022 passed by the learned Single Judge disposing of the writ petition (W.P.(C) No.5543 of 2022). While disposing of the writ petition, learned Single Judge has observed thus :

¶16

“....

¶17

2. Following the caution in Cicily Kallarackal v. Vehicle Factory, reported in (2012) 8 SCC 524 , this Bench has already held by, inter alia, order dated 15^th February, 2022 in W.P.(C) No.39236 (TPWODL v. District Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission), intervention in writ jurisdiction is not possible regarding matters covered by the consumer protection laws. As such, there is no occasion for direction of issuance of notice. No order can be made.”

¶18

2 . The writ petition was filed seeking a direction to the District Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission, Berhampur, Ganjam to reconstruct the records of Consumer Case No.92 of 2009 in the matter of

¶19

// 2 //

¶20

Srinivas Pradhan v. Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd. and another, after it was reported by the said District Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission, Berhampur, Ganjam that the records of the case have been misplaced in the office.

¶21

3. Notices were issued by this Court by order dated 26.09.2022. On the next date of listing on 13.12.2022, to give a quietus to the issue raised in the writ petition, the following order was passed :

¶22

“... ...

¶23

Mr. Mohanty, learned Additional Standing Counsel for the respondent nos.1 to 4 based on a letter no.674 dated 9^th December, 2022 states that the records regarding the Consumer Complaint No.92/2009 are not available. He prays for time to seek instructions regarding the modalities of the reconstruction.”

¶24

4 . When the matter is taken up today, learned Additional Standing Counsel refers to the letter no.63 dated 05.01.2023 received by him from the Secretary, State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Odisha, Cuttack copy of which has been filed before this Court and taken on record. The contents of the said letter no.63 dated 05.01.2023 is quoted herein :

¶25

“Inviting reference on the subject cited above, I am directed to say that the case record i.e., Consumer Complaint No.92 of 2009 relating to District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Ganjam is not available in the Commission as per the report of the President District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Ganjan and the said case record

¶26

Page 2 of 3

¶27

// 3 //

¶28

can be reconstructed by collecting documents from the respective parties.”

¶29

5 . In view of the above, it is directed that the office of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission; Ganjam, Berhampur shall do the needful to reconstruct the case record in the most authentic and suitable manner after collecting the documents from the respective parties to the dispute before the learned District Forum within one month from today but in any case not later than 28^th February, 2023. It is further directed that the learned District Forum shall do well to expedite the matter after reconstruction and proceed in accordance with law, and positively conclude the adjudication in next three months, i.e., by 31^st May, 2023.

¶30

Accordingly, the writ appeal is allowed and the writ petition: W.P.(C) No.5543 of 2022 is disposed of in terms of the above order.

¶31

(Jaswant Singh) (M.S.Sahoo) Judge Judge

¶32

18^th January, 2023 Cuttack

¶33

Gs/dutta

¶34

Page 3 of 3

Srinivas Pradhan v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Srinivas Pradhan v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Manjurani Enterprise Vs United India Insura

Raghunath Nayak Vs Branch Head, Uco Bank,Balianta Branch

Prasanta Kumar Sahoo Vs Ao Cum Rm, Canara Bank, Bbsr

Sudhansu Sekhar Mahapatra Vs Ao,Utkal Grameen Bank,Sambalpur

Chilukuri Venkat Rao Vs Sambalpur Dist.Coop

Sk Najuddin @ Najiruddin Vs State of Odisha