ANUP KUMAR SAHU Vs. BHAGIRATHI DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition has been preferred against the order dated 24.10.2006 passed by the District Consumer Forum, Ranchi in Complaint Case No. 147/05 allowing the amendment sought for by the complainant so as to substitute the quantum of compensation under heads already indicated in the complaint. Challenge is made on two counts (1) the Forum does not have the power to allow amendment and (2) that the amendment amounts to change the nature of the proceedings. With a view to canvass the first question reference is made to Section 13(4) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 which, inter alia, reads as under: (4) For the purposes of this section, the District Forum shall have the same powers as are vested in a Civil Court under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908) while trying a suit in respect of the following matters, namely; - (i) the summoning and enforcing attendance of any defendant or witness and examining the witness on oath; (ii) the discovery and production of any document or other material object producible as evidence; (iii) the reception of evidence on affidavits; (iv) the requisitioning of the report of the concerned analysis or test from the appropriate laboratory or from any other relevant source; (v) issuing of any commission for the examination of any Witness; and (vi) any other matter which may be prescribed.

(2.) BASED upon the aforesaid provision, it is contended that since Order 6 Rule 17 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure has not been made applicable to the proceedings under the consumer Protection Act, the Court does not have the jurisdiction and power to grant amendment.

(3.) I am not in agreement with the contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the Consumer Forum has no power or authority to allow amendment.