STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION HARYANA, PANCHKULA
Date of Institution: 12.12.2017
Date of final hearing: 23.08.2023
Date of pronouncement: 01.09.2023
Revision Petition No.134 of 2017
IN THE MATTER OF:
Vimal @ Bimal Lakhotia S/o Sh. Poonam Chand, R/o H.No. 116, Sector-11E, Faridabad, Tehsil Ballabgarh, Distt. Faridabad, Haryana.
....Revisionist
Versus
1. Farhan Khan S/o Sh. F.Z. Murad, R/o H. No. 1898, Type-3, N.H.-3, NIT, Faridabad, Distt. Faridabad, Haryana.
2. M/s Avaloan Aviation Academy Pvt. Ltd., SCO No. 58-59, Sector-31, Above Reliance Fresh, Near Pristine Mall, Faridabad, through its whole time Director Ms. Anuj Priya Kacker.
CORAM: Naresh Katyal, Judicial Member
Argued by:- Sh. Anirudh Kush, counsel for the petitioner.
None for respondent No.1.
Sh. Dixit Garg, counsel for respondent No.2.
ORDER
NARESH KATYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
Challenge in this Revision Petition No.134 of 2017 has been invited by Vimal @ Bimal Lakhotia to the legality of order dated 17.10.2017 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-Faridabad (In short “District Consumer Commission”) in Execution Petition No.108 of 2012 vide which: Bailable warrant has been issued against him in a sum of Rs.2,000/- with one surety in the like amount for 22.12.2017.
2. Complaint No. 305 of 2011 titled as “Frahan Khan versus M/s Avalon Aviation Academy Pvt. Ltd.” through its Managing Director Mr. Vimal Lakhotia was filed on 08.08.2011 and same was allowed on 09.07.2012. Para No. 6 is the operative part of order dated 09.07.2016. It is reproduced below:-
“6. Resultantly, the respondent is directed to refund an amount of Rs.76,983/- to the complainant with interest @9% p.a. from 28.12.2010 (last date of payment of fee) till the date of actual payment.
ii) The respondent is further directed to pay an amount of Rs.40,000/- to the complainant towards the wastage of his one year, mental harassment and litigation expenses.”
3. Execution Petition No. 108 of 2012 was filed by complainant on 28.08.2012. In execution proceedings, warrants were issued against Vimal @ Bimal Lakhotia, who appeared and filed his affidavit dated 20.03.2013 mentioning that” “he and his wife has no concern with M/s Avalon Aviation Academy Pvt. Ltd. or with M/s Sky Lark Aviations in any manner nor the deponent has contested the main complaint before Hon’ble forum and neither deponent and his wife ever remain employed with said organizations”. Noticing the text of affidavit, order dated 20.03.2013 was passed in execution proceedings which recites: “The counsel for the JD has filed affidavit of the Director of the JD Sh. Vimal Lakhotia. Now, the execution application is adjourned to 01.05.2013 for filing of name of another Director of the J.D. by D.H.”
4. Vimal Lakhotia also filed application for recalling warrants and for deleting his name assigned as Managing Director of JD Company. Application was dismissed on 02.06.2017. In that order (dated 02.06.2017) also it is observed that: “in view of order dated 20.03.2013, DH is directed to file name of another Director of JD till 14.06.2017”. Vimal Lakhotia also filed Revision Petition No. 81 of 2017 earlier before this Commission on 13.09.2017. It was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 31.10.2017.
5. Name of other Director of JD was not given by DH in terms of order dated 02.06.2017 passed in execution proceedings or in terms of 20.03.2013. In wake of above situation; vide order dated 17.10.2017 (impugned herein); Bailable warrants were again issued against Vimal Lakhotia.
6. Feeling aggrieved; he filed present Revision Petition.
7. Learned counsel appearing for revisionist has contended that revisionist did not raise any contest to the consumer’s complaint. He was wrongly projected as Managing Director of M/s Avalon Aviation Academy Pvt. Ltd. (JD-firm) in the array of memo of parties and this fact came to his knowledge when he received warrants issued by learned District Consumer Commission in execution proceedings. It is urged that JD/firm (M/s Avalon Aviation Academy Pvt. Ltd.-respondent No.2 herein) was only a tenant in the premises of revisionist. It is also urged that M/s Avalon Aviation Academy Pvt. Ltd. filed written statement and evidence by way of affidavit of its Director namely Ketan H. Shah in the consumer’s complaint. It is further urged that in terms of orders dated 20.03.2013 and 02.06.2017; DH was required to file name of another Director of JD/firm namely M/s Avalon Aviation Academy Pvt. Ltd., which was not done and impugned order dated 17.10.2017 was passed, whereby Bailable warrants against revisionist were again issued.
8. Learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 herein-M/s Avalon Aviation Academy Pvt. Ltd. could not put forward any convincing argument to counter the submissions made on behalf of revisionist. He has only urged that execution proceedings are still pending before learned District Consumer Commission and simultaneously also endorsed that name of fresh Director of M/s Avalon Aviation Academy Pvt. Ltd. was not filed by DH in the execution proceedings in terms of order dated 20.03.2013 and 02.06.2017.
9. Vide order dated 14.12.2017 passed by this Commission implementation of impugned order 17.10.2017 qua issuance of Bailable warrants against Vimal Lakhotia has been stayed. On imparting subjective analysis to the rival submissions; this Commission is of firm opinion that impugned order dated 17.10.2017 is legally not sustainable. Affidavit dated 20.03.2013 of revisionist was admittedly filed before learned District Consumer Commission in execution proceedings. This affidavit explicitly recites that he and his wife has no concern with M/s Avalon Aviation Academy Pvt. Ltd. or with M/s Sky Lark Aviations in any manner, nor, the deponent has contested the main complaint before Hon’ble Forum and neither deponent and his wife ever remained employed with said organizations. Taking note of the phraseology of affidavit dated 20.03.2013 of revisionist; order dated 20.03.2017 was passed in execution proceedings vide which DH was required to file name of another Director of M/s Avalon Aviation Academy Pvt. Ltd. This was not done by DH and impugned order dated 17.10.2017 got the light of its day vide which Bailable warrants were again issued against revisionist.
10. At legal pedestal, Bailable warrants are only issued to secure the presence of any JD/respondent, so that the legal proceedings to get the order executed, should continue its pace, meaningfully. It is for no other purpose. In the present case, as it is so apparent from file of Revision Petition that Bailable warrant has been issued against Vimal @ Bimal Lakhotia, by projecting him to be Managing Director of M/s Avalon Aviation Academy Pvt. Ltd. in the execution proceedings. This has been done, only because in the consumer complaint M/s Avalon Aviation Academy Pvt. Ltd. has been sued through Managing Director and revisionist has been projected as Managing Director. Palpably, the error qua name of Managing Director had been brought to the notice of Executing Court by revisionist through his affidavit dated 20.03.2013. The whole process of materializing the relief granted to DH through order dated 09.07.2012 passed in consumer complaint has landed in jeopardy. Revisionist cannot be called upon in execution proceedings to answer the relief granted to DH in consumer complaint in the light of text of his affidavit dated 20.03.2013, particularly when revisionist had not raised any contest in the proceedings of consumer’s complaint in his alleged capacity as Managing Director of M/s Avalon Aviation Academy Pvt. Ltd. He has been wrongly projected as Managing Director of JD-firm. As per the memorandum of this Revision Petition (ground No. ii); consumer complaint was contested by Ketan H. Shah who had filed written statement and evidence by way of affidavit. Consequently, issuance of Bailable warrants against revisionist-Vimal @ Bimal Lakhotia through impugned order dated 17.10.2017 is gross and manifest illegality.
11. This being so, impugned order dated 17.10.2017 cannot sustain at legal pedestal. It suffers from illegality and accordingly set aside. This Revision Petition is allowed. DH/Frahan Khan will now furnish fresh name and address of Managing Director of JD-firm namely M/s Avalon Aviation Academy Pvt. Ltd. in the execution proceedings to enable the Executing Court/learned District Consumer Commission to proceed ahead as per law.
12. A copy of this judgment be provided to all the parties free of cost as mandated by the Consumer Protection Act, 1986/2019. The judgment be uploaded forthwith on the website of the commission for the perusal of the parties.
13. File be consigned to record room.
Date of pronouncement: 01st September, 2023
Naresh Katyal
Judicial Member
Addl. Bench-II
