M.C.No.722 of 2022

R.P.No.70 of 2022

         Heard learned counsel for both sides.

2.      Learned counsel for the O.Ps. filed affidavit. Copy of the same be served on the other side.

3.      Concerned officer of the Bank is present. Learned counsel for the petitioners/O.Ps. challenges the order passed by the learned District Commission on dated 13.10.2022 purportedly passed in E.A.No.33/2022  where under the O.Ps having been directed to pay cost of Rs.50,000/-  within 15 days and also passed  order to release the vehicle within 7 days from the date of receipt of the order, failing which Rs.2,000/- per day shall be paid by the O.Ps to the complainant.

4.      Learned counsel for the petitioners further  submitted that the learned District Forum without disposing the consumer complaint has entertained the execution case which is otherwise abuse of process of law. However, he submitted that they have released the vehicle.  He also submitted that necessary order may be passed to  set aside the impugned order by allowing the revision petition for payment of cost and defaulted cost.

5.      Learned counsel for the O.P./complainant submitted that the order of this Commission and District Commission have not been complied by the O.Ps/revision petitioners  for which they have filed the execution application No.33/22. 

6.      Considered the submissions of both parties. Perused the impugned order and the affidavit. The operative portion of the impugned order is as follows:-

“We therefore direct the opposite parties to release the vehicle immediately. The complainant shall pay the EMI of 28.08.2022 within 15 days after release of the vehicle. The other two EMIs of September and October,2022 shall be paid within six months. We imposed cost of Rs.50,000/- on opposite parties and officers who are responsible  and liable to pay the cost to the complainant within 15 days from the date of receipt of the order. The opposite parties are free to recover the amount from the officer/ officials at fault. The opposite parties shall release the vehicle within 7 days from the date of receipt of the order, failing which Rs.2,000/- per day shall be paid by the opposite parties to the complainant.

Since the vehicle has been repossessed by the opposite parties when the complainant was paying his EMIs  regularly as directed by Hon’ble State Commission and the next EMI due was on 28.08.2022  but the vehicle has been repossessed on 25.08.2022 , when no dues was pending for which we direct the opposite parties not to claim any repossession charge and stock yard charge from the period from 25.08.2022 to till release of the vehicle.”

7.      The aforesaid order has not disclosed about any show cause called for from the O.Ps (concerned officer) so as to prove compliance of  due process of law. Apart from this, the necessary order passed by this Commission has not been followed.  We have seen from the above order that the petitioners have visited this Commission and this Commission time and again directed the learned District Commission to dispose of the complaint case within 60 days. Learned District Commission instead of following the  direction of this Commission has  passed the impugned order and finally disposed of the execution proceeding by violating natural justice.Since the vehicle has been released, we find that the necessary imposition of  cost of Rs.50,000/- and defaulted amount Rs.2,000/- per day is set aside  and we reiterate  and direct that the learned District Commission shall dispose of the case within 45 days from today in accordance with law if not disposed of  in the mean time. 

          Necessary compliance of this order be confirmed by the learned District Commission after disposal of the case.

          Both parties are directed to appear before the learned District Commission on 05.12.2022 to receive further instruction from it.