Learned counsel for the revision petitioner is present.
None appears on behalf of the OP.
On request and consent of learned counsel for the revision petitioner, the revision petition is taken up for hearing and disposal at the stage of admission.
In this revision petition, revision petitioner has made prayer to set aside the interim order dated 1.3.2019 passed by the learned District Forum, Sundargarh – I in Misc. Case No. 25 of 2019 arising out of CC No. 33 of 2019.
Revision petitioner Financer is the OP whereas the OP in this revision petition is the complainant before the learned District Forum.
The impugned order in its entirety reads as follows:-
“The case record is put up today as it is fixed for filing objection if any by the OPs. and hearing of the petition Under Section 13(3-B) of the CP Act as filed by the petitioner praying for rerelease of the seized vehicle bearing Regd. No. OD-116D-8798 kept under the custody of the OPs. The petitioner is present personally. Notice issued to the O.Ps regarding interim application, having objection if any, AD returned back and attached with the record. The O.Ps appeared before this Forum through his counsel T.K.Harichandan and files V.Nama along with xerox copy of arbitration award.
Heard from the petitioner, perused the documents available in the case records. We are satisfied and convinced that the circumstances at present of the matter warranting to grant of interim relief which would be justify as the case for an interim relief has been made out and exigencies of the situation demand that the interim relief is must in the interest of justice and in the fact and situation obtained in the particular matter.
Accordingly the misc. case is allowed. The O.P./Branch Manager, Tata Motors Finance Ltd, Sambalpur is hereby directed to release the vehicle bearing Regd. No.OD-16D-8798 in fv our of the complainant namely Madhusudan Kamar after receiving 50% of outstanding dues till date of seizure without charging any other charges, within 07 days from the date of receiving of this order. The complainant is also directed to continue his repayment.”
It is contended by the learned counsel for the revision petitioner that on 1.3.2019, matter before the District Forum was posted for appearance of the revision petitioner and filing of objection in Misc. Case No. 25 of 2019 which is an interim application filed under section 13(3B) of Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The revision petitioner appeared through counsel and filed arbitral award dated 8.1.2019 between the parties to urge that in view of passing of the arbitral award in respect of self same dispute between the parties the complaint is not maintainable. However, the learned District Forum passed the impugned order without considering the oral objection regarding the maintainability of the complaint.
Admittedly, case was posted to 1.3.2019 for filing written objection and the revision petitioner did not file any written objection.
Be that as it may, when copy of the arbitral award was filed, the District Forum ought to have considered the effect of passing of the said award prior to passing of the impugned order. It is also apparent that the learned District Forum has not assigned any reason in support of passing of the interim order.
In the above circumstances, the revision petition is allowed and the impugned order is set aside directing the revision petitioner to file written objection in Misc. Case No. 25 of 2019 within a period of two weeks from today upon which learned District Forum shall proceed to pass fresh order in the Misc. Case within a period of 10 days from the date of filing of the written objection upon reference to the grounds taken in the written objection and upon consideration of the effect of passing of the arbitral award as contended by the revision petitioner.
Learned counsel for the revision petitioner submits that the revision petitioner undertakes to file the certified copy of this order before the learned District Forum along with the written objection to the Misc. Application.
