Kundan Kumar Kumai

This is an application u/s 73 (1) (a) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 preferred against the Order passed in EA/06/2021 against an Order dated 09/06/2022, passed by the Ld. DCDRC, Alipurduar.

Brief fact of the Case is that the Respondent/Complainant, had filed the Complaint Case against the Revisionist, on 24/02/2020, being Case No. CC/06/2020 and the Ld. DCDRC, Alipurduar had allowed that Case ex-parte against the Revisionist with a direction to make payment of Rs.34,090/- (Rupees thirty-four thousand ninety) only along with 8% interest on the date of expiry of 72 (seventy-two) months from 25/10/2022, till the repayment of the said amount and also to pay Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) only and Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand) only, as compensation for mental agony and harassment and litigation cost respectively, within 30 (thirty) days, from the date of receiving the above Order. Thereafter, on non -payment, the execution Case EA/06/2021, had been filed on 22/11/2021. During the course of the above Case, a warrant of arrest had been issued, vide the Impugned Order for realization of the entire decretal amount.

The authorized representative of the Revisionist had been transferred from his office and the new authorized representative in his position, for which reason the non-attendance of the authorized representative on 26/05/2022 and on 09/06/2022, in EA/06/2021, had resulted in the issuance of the warrant of arrest. That apart the main case being Case No. CC/6/2020 had been decided ex-parte wherein the Revisionist could not file written version. It is also the case of the Revisionist that the embargo passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court had resulted in the non-payment of the decretal amount. Hence, the Revisionist had filed this instant Revision. 

                                             Decisions with Reasons

Ld. Advocate for the Revisionist at the time of final hearing, had submitted that the absence of the authorized representative on the dates due to his transfer had resulted in the passing of the Impugned Order, as the Revisionist had no intention of not complying with the Order passed in CC/06/2020, as it was due to the embargo passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in IA no. 56308 of 2023 in Writ Petition © no.191 of 2022 in Pinak Pani Mohanty Vs. Union of India & Ors. He, therefore, prays for setting aside the Impugned Order.

Ld. Advocate for the OP, on the other hand, had submitted that the Revisionist had filed this instant Application merely to misguide this Commission and delay the payment. He, therefore, prays for dismissing the instant Application.

At the very outset, it needs to be pointed out that there is nothing in the Order passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in IA no. 56308 of 2023 in Writ Petition (C) no.191 of 2022 in Pinak Pani Mohanty Vs. Union of India & Ors., which creates an embargo to the payment of the decretal amount directed by the different Consumer Commissions. Under the circumstance, this argument on behalf of the Revisionist cannot be sustained.

Moreover, there is nothing with the Application to support the contention of the Revisionist that the authorized representative could not attend on the mentioned dates, due to his transfer. Under the circumstance, this contention of the Revisionist also cannot be accepted. Under the circumstance, order for issuance of warrant of arrest, for compliance of the order, does not call for interference from this end. Hence, the instant Application is bound to fail.

                                                          It is therefore

                                                           ORDERED

That the instant Appeal be and same is dismissed on contest with cost of Rs.1000/- (Rupees one thousand) only, payable to the Respondent.

The Impugned Order is thereby upheld.

Copy of the Order be sent to the Parties free of cost.

Copy of the Order be sent to the Ld. DCDRC, Alipurduar for necessary information.