WEST BENGAL STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD Vs. TEXDYE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The order dated 6.8.1993 passed by the Ld. District Forum in C. D. F. Case No.1778 of 1991 has been rectified by subsequent order dated 8.9.1993. In the said order dated 8.9.1993 the Ld. Calcutta District Forum directed the complainant who is respondent is this appeal to deposit Rs.1,000/- to the appellant and to test the meter of the complainant/opposite Party by C. E. I. upon deposit of the requisite fees in this regard and the C. E. I. to conclude its investigation within two months thereof and in the mean time the appellant who was Opposite Party in the complaint case was directed to maintain the electric line of complainant/respondent during the aforesaid adjudication of the dispute by C. E. I. By the subsequent order dated 8.9.1993, the Ld. District Forum modified and/or rectified the earlier order dated 6.8.1993 to the effect that the complainant/opposite Party shall pay Rs.20,000/- as an ad-hoc basis and the matter be referred to the C. E. I. for adjudication and he shall submit report within two months. The appellant W. B. S. E. B. shall effect the conversion of the electric supply of the complainant from hi-tension to low tension immediately and shall raise bills from August, 1993 on the basis of such low-tension connection and the Opposite party shall not disconnect the electric line of the complainant/opposite party during the aforesaid period of adjudication.

(2.) The crux of the contentions raised by the Appellant WBSEB that the Consumer Redressal Forum have no jurisdiction and/or competency to revise, modify and or review its own order, in view that there is no such provisions in the Consumer Protection Act, itself and also that the National Commission has been pleased to hold that the agency self up under the Consumer Protection Act cannot review its own order and judgment.

(3.) Although the power of rectification and/ or modification or so to say the review of its order by the Consumer Redressal Forum is not provided in so many words under the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act but the power to rectify and/or modify and/or review its order is the inherent jurisdiction of the judicial authority, as such the Consumer Redressal Forum being a judicial authority under the statute if it finds ex-facie that some material documents and/or evidence have not been considered due to failure on the part of the complainant to disclose those at the time of hearing for which the order passed in the matter suffers from infirmity and illegality causing thereby serious injustice and prejudice to the aggrieved party and subsequently those documents are discovered we do not find any bar to reconsider the order on the basis of such documents and/or evidence discovered subsequently and produce before the consumer Redressal Forum for the ends of justice. The main purpose of said modification and /or rectification is to subserve the principle of natural justice.