Sri Amal Kumar Dawn vs Mukta Shil & Ors
2022 Latest Caselaw 7650 Cal

18.11.2022 Item No.5 Ct. No.7 CHC

C.O.3303 of 2022

Sri Amal Kumar Dawn Vs.

Mukta Shil & ors.

C & CR

Mr. Partha Pratim Roy, Ms. Poulami Chakraborty ...for the petitioner

The order passed by learned D.C.D.R.C., Nadia, in

connection with Execution Application

No.EA/31/2019, arising out of Complaint Case

No.CC/18 of 2018 issuing Warrant of Arrest against

the judgement-debtor by the Commission was

admittedly challenged preferring an appeal being First

Appeal No.A/622/2019, before the State Consumer

Disputes Redressal Commission, West Bengal.

The appellate body affirmed the order of the

Commission issuing Warrant of Arrest due to non

compliance of the order passed by the Commission.

Mr. Roy, while assailing the impugned order

submits that the complaint case was registered before

the Commission against the management of Sahara

India Parivar, in which the petitioner worked as an

agent.

Admittedly, there has been some compensation

granted directing Jdr to make payment in terms of the

order of the Commission. Since there has been

violation of the order of Commission, an execution

proceeding was invited by the decree-holder, wherein

the Commission issued non bailable Warrant of Arrest

against the judgement-debtor.

Mr. Roy submits that order directing to make

payment in connection with a case initiated before the

Consumer Redressal Commission (trial court) is

nothing but would be treated as good as money decree.

It is contended by Mr. Roy that coercive measure

straightway cannot be taken against the judgement-

debtor without resorting to provisions available under

Order 21 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

Taking recourse to an unreported judgement

passed by coordinate Bench of this Court in

C.R.R.2955 of 2022, rendered in the case of Samasth

Infotainment Pvt. Ltd. and Ors. vs. The State of

West Bengal & ors., Mr. Roy submits that that the

formulation of law making reinforcement of the

provisions of Order 21 C.P.C. in order to execute an

order passed by the Commission has already been

circulated to all D.C.D.R.Cs and State Commission

Disputes Redressal Commission. In a situation like

this, the coercive action undertaken to execute an

order of the Commission straightway by issuing

Warrant of Arrest is not according to law.

Accordingly, the impugned order passed in First

Appeal No.A/622/2019 dated 31st May, 2022,

dismissing the appeal upon affirming order passed by

the Commission be stayed with a further order that the

Warrant of Arrest, issued against the judgment-debtor

may not be executed till second week of January,

2023, or until further order, whichever is earlier.

Petitioner is directed to serve copy of this revisional

application upon the opposite parties and their learned

advocate appearing in the court below, by Speed Post

with Acknowledgement Due and furnish affidavit-of-

service on the next returnable date.

List the matter in the first week of January, 2023.

(Subhasis Dasgupta, J.)