ABHINAY RAJ SRIVASTAVA Vs. M/S KSN BUILDCON PVT. LTD.
LAWS(NCD)-2020-2-21
NCDRC
Decided on February 05,2020

ABHINAY RAJ SRIVASTAVA Appellant
VERSUS
KSN BUILDCON PVT LTD Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Prem Narain, j. - (1.) This consumer complaint has been filed by seven complainants namely Mr. Abhinay Raj Srivastava & Ors. against the opposite party M/s. KSN Buildon Pvt. Ltd, u/s. 21(a)(i) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 read with Section 12(1)(c) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 in short ("the Act").
(2.) The learned counsel for the opposite party stated that six complainants have settled the matter with the opposite party as is clear from the settlement deeds filed.One complainant namely Mr. Mrinal Harsh Vardhan has filed an application stating that he wants to withdraw his name from the list of the complainants.On 25.09.2019, the matter was listed for filing of the settlement deeds which the learned counsel for the opposite party has filed.However, the learned counsel for the complainant, who is also one of the complainants in the present complaint, stated that he wants to withdraw his application filed for withdrawing his name from the array of complainants.He further stated that one application being I.A. No. 9629/2019 has been filed by another person who wants to get impleaded in the present complaint case.
(3.) Learned counsel for the opposite party stated that as the complaint has been filed by seven persons and six persons have already settled the matter and they also do not want to contest the present complaint, and the remaining one complainant has already filed an application for withdrawal of his name from the complaint, therefore, the complaint has become infructuous, as well as not maintainable.He further states that complainant namely Mr. Mrinal Harsh Varshan wants to withdraw his earlier application which was filed for withdrawal of his name from the list of the complainants just to harass the opposite party and to continue with the complaint anyhow.Moreover, he has not filed any application in this regard so far.Therefore, his application for withdrawal of his name from the list of the complainants should be accepted.So far as the new application of another impelader namely Mr. Bhagwati Prasad is concerned, the same has not been accepted by this Commission so far and no approval has been given on the application filed u/s. 12(1)(c) of the Act in the original complaint nor any public notice has been issued as per order I rule 8 of the CPC.Impleadment has to be allowed after order has been passed accepting application u/s. 12(1)(c) of the Act.In the present case neither application u/s. 12(1)(c) of the Act has been allowed nor any public notice has been issued in the matter, therefore, application moved for impleadment is pre-mature and cannot be accepted.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.