| First Appeal No. A/503/2019 | | ( Date of Filing : 05 Jul 2019 ) | | (Arisen out of Order Dated 31/05/2019 in Case No. Execution Application No. EA/14/2019 of District Kolkata-I(North)) |
| | | | 1. M/s. Orientation Transport & Logistics Pvt. Ltd. (OTL) & Others | | 7, Ganesh Chandra Avenue, 3rd & 5th Floor, Guha Building, P.S. - Bowbazar, Kolkata - 700 013. | | 2. Sri Adhrick Roy, Managing Director, Orientation Transport & Logistics | | 21, Durga Bari Road, Dum Dum Gora Bazar, Gr. Floor, Kolkata - 700 028. | | 3. Baisakhi Roy(nee Ghosh), Director, OTL | | W/o Adhrick Roy, 21, Durga Bari Road, Dum Dum Gora Bazar, Gr. Floor, Kolkata - 700 028. | | 4. Mahadeb Ghosh | | 21, Durga Bari Road, Dum Dum Gora Bazar, Gr. Floor, Kolkata - 700 028. | | 5. Subhasish Sen, Director, OTL | | 90, R.B.C. Road Extension, South Dum Dum, North 24 Pgs., Kolkata - 700 028. | | 6. Subhasish Sen, Director, OTL | | 2B, Grant Lane, Room no.-303, Kolkata - 700 012. | | 7. Subhasish Sen, Director, OTL | | Mainaak Residency, 207, N.S.C. Bose Road, Flat -41, Kolkata - 700 040. |
| ...........Appellant(s) | |
| Versus | | 1. Debasish Basak | | S/o Lt. Samarendra Basak, 79/2C, Pathuria Ghata Street, Kolkata - 700 006. |
| ...........Respondent(s) |
|
|
| Final Order / Judgement | Shyamal Kumar Ghosh, Presiding Member - The instant appeal against Execution application being no-503/2019 has been preferred by the appellants challenging the impugned order no – 4 dated 31/05/2019 passed by the ld Trial Commission, Kolkata Unit – 1 in connection with execution application being no – EA/14/2019 wherein the ld Concerned Commission was pleased to issue non-bailable warrant of arrest against the jdrs and to fix a date for E/R of non-bailable warrant of arrest. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with such order the appellants/jdrs filed the instant appeal before this Commission.
- The record has been taken up for final hearing.
- We have heard the ld. counsels appearing for both sides at length and in full.
- We have carefully perused the materials on record and the order impugned dated 31/05/2019.
- The order being no – 4 dated 31/05/2019 runs as follows:-
Dhr is present. None appears on behalf of jdrs. Dhr prays for issuance of non-bailable warrant of arrest as against jdrs. Heard. Considered. The prayer is allowed. Issue non bailable warrant of arrest as against jdrs. Fix 11/07/2019 for E/R for non-bailable warrant of arrest. Dhr to file requisites. Office to comply. Now we try to discuss the provisions under Section 27(1) and 27A(1) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 in order to adjudicate the matter and also to reach the final decision regarding disposal of the aforesaid appeal. Section 27(1) of the said Act runs as follows:- “Where a trader or a person against whom a complaint is made or the complainant fails or omits to comply with any order made by the District Forum, the State Commission or the National Commission, as the case may be, such trader or person or complainant shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than one month but which may extend to three years, or with fine which shall not be less than two thousand rupees but which may extend to ten thousand rupees or with both.” Section 27A(1) of the said Act runs as follows:- “Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal procedure, 1973, an appeal under section 27, both on facts and on law, shall lie from:- - The order made by the District Forum to the State Commission,
- The order made by the State Commission to the National Commission,
- The order made by the National Commission to the Supreme Court.”
- Upon careful bare reading of the aforesaid provisions, it is clear to us that when the order of punishment for imprisonment or fine or with both is passed by the Ld. District Forum (now District Commission) the Appellant is at liberty to file an appeal against such order before the State Commission.
- But upon careful perusal of the aforesaid impugned order passed by the ld trial commission it is clear to us that no order relating to the punishment for imprisonment or fine or with both has been passed against the jdrs and as such the appellants/jdrs have no such authority to file the instant AEA on the ground of mere issuance of the warrant of arrest against the jdrs/appellants.
- Under such circumstances, we can safely rely upon a remarkable case law Ravikant G Salaskar vs Kirit Shah and others reported in 2018(2) CPR 558 (NC) wherein the Hon’ble National Commission held that the appeal against non-bailable warrant of arrest under section 27A is not maintainable.
- Considering all aspects from all angles and keeping in mind the present position of law and regard being had to the submission of the ld counsels for both sides and the citation of Hon’ble NCDRC we are of the opinion that there is no such wrong, error, mistake or any illegality in passing the order dated 31/05/2019 passed by the concerned Trial Commission below and in pursuant to the present position of law, we also hold that the appellants/jdrs have no such authority to file the instant AEA challenging the order impugned.
- Accordingly, we are constrained to dismiss the instant appeal on contest without any order as to costs.
- Resultantly, We also affirm the order impugned passed by the ld Trial Commission.
- As per above observations the instant AEA stands disposed of.
- Note accordingly.
- Let a copy of this order be transmitted to the ld. Trial Commission at once for compliance and for taking necessary action.
| |
