ORDER (Per : Justice Irshad Hussain, President) : Propriety and legality of the orders dated 02.06.2009 passed by the District Forum, Dehradun has been challenged in both these Revision Petitions filed by the opposite party No. 1 of consumer complaint Nos. 130 of 2008 and 129 of 2008 filed against the said opposite party No. 1 and two others by the complainants of these cases, one of which Smt. Sarla Sehgal is common complainant in both the cases. 2. Revisionist felt aggrieved by the order impugned on account of the decision taken by the learned District Forum that his application for either deleting his name or dismissing complaint against him, shall be disposed of at the time of final arguments in the case. It would appeal that the revisionist Sh. Ubaidullah Khan, Deputy General Manager of the District Co-operative Bank, Main Branch, Dehradun has been impleaded by his name in both the consumer complaints and the opposite party No. 1 has, thus, questioned propriety of impleading him in these case by name, particularly in view of the allegations that the action against him complained of, related to exercise of his duties as Deputy General Manager of the District Co-operative Bank and not in his personal capacity. Therefore, the opposite party No. 1 was fully justified in moving the application seeking either deletion of his name or dismissal of the complaint against him, as no personal cause of action had arisen against him in these complaints. It would also appear that Deputy General Manager of the District Co-operative Bank, which is a registered society, is itself a juristic person and, therefore, there was no necessity to implead opposite party No. 1 by his name and it would have been sufficient if the opposite party No. 1 was to be impleaded in his official capacity as Deputy General Manager of the District Co-operative bank and not in his personal capacity, as has been done in these cases. Since the propriety goes to the root of the matter at the initial stage, the learned District Forum was not at all justified to defer the decision on the application of the opposite party No. 1 till final arguments in the case and that in holding that no useful purpose would have been served in deciding the dispute raised by the opposite party No. 1. Therefore, in passing the impugned orders dated 02.06.2009, the learned District Forum failed to exercise the jurisdiction vested in it by law and, therefore, the impugned orders can not legally be maintained. 3. Both the Revision Petition are allowed. Orders impugned dated 02.06.2009 of the District Forum are set aside. The complainants of both the consumer compliant are hereby directed to amend their complaints, so as to delete the name of the opposite party No. 1 – revisionist from the array of the parties in his personal capacity and to retain the opposite party No. 1, District Co-operative Bank, Main Branch, Dehradun through Deputy General Manager itself. The amendment application in that regard shall be moved within 15 days from the date of this order, which shall be disposed of by the learned District Forum according to law. No order as to costs. 4. Let the copy of the order be kept on the record of Revision Petition No. 26/2009.