09.03.2022

O R D E R

          BY Mr. K.B.SANGANNANAVAR : JUDICIAL MEMBER

1.    This petition is filed U/s.17(1)(b) of CPA 1986 to set aside the order dtd.23.04.2019 passed in CC/22/2016 (Rural) on the file of 1^st Addl., District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Bengaluru.
2. We examined the impugned order and grounds of revision.
3. The CC/22/2016 is received by the District Forum on 20.07.2016 was admitted  by the DF and the OP submitted their version. Enquiry was held and fixed the case to hear arguments on merits commencing from 15.12.2016 and the matter  was adjourned on adjourned repeatedly. On 23.04.2019 the stage was to issue NBW against Managing Director Mr.Manohar Reddy on the ground that he has violated the order of the Forum and the warrant has to be executed through Commissioner of Police returnable by 04.05.2019. In this regard, if we examined the previous proceedings of the case could see that there was a direction of the District Forum to keep Mr.Manohar Reddy present before the forum. It is not that the matter is already reached to its logical end and the DF is on Execution proceedings, but still  at the stage of hearing the arguments as such issuance of NBW against the OP  in our view is incorrect. In this regard it would be appropriate to follow the recent judgment passed by Hon’ble Apex Court in Civil appeal No.5894 to 5895/2021 in the case of L & T Finance Ltd., vs. Pramod Kumar Rana & Anr., wherein Hon’ble Justice Mr.M.R.Shah.J and Hon’ble Justice Mrs.B.V.Nagarathna dtd.25.11.2021, wherein held bailable warrants are to be issued as last resort and only in a case where it is found that the opponent parties are not corresponding at all and that they are avoiding appearance before the National Commission deliberately and/or they are not represented at all either through their authorised representative or through their counsel. It is therefore, in the case on hand, Revision Petitioner/OP having been represented by the learned counsel could have been heard by the District Forum and decides the consumer complaint finally fixing the case to hear arguments on merits in the complaint. However, passed the impugned order issuing NBW is not sustainable is liable to be set aside. In other words the Commission below committed error of jurisdiction which requires to be revised.
4. Accordingly impugned order is set aside by allowing this Revision Petition with a direction to District Forum to decide the consumer complaint finally on merits affording opportunities to both parties as early as possible not later than 3 months from the date of receipt of this order.
5. Notify copy of this Order to the District Commission and parties.

   Lady Member                                Judicial Member               

*NS*