Orissa

StateCommission

RP/75/2022

The Manager, Cholamandalam MS General Insurance , - Complainant(s)

Versus

Smt. Smaranika Pratihari - Opp.Party(s)

M/S G.P.Dutta & Assoc.

04 Jan 2023

ORDER

IN THE STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
ODISHA, CUTTACK
 
Revision Petition No. RP/75/2022
( Date of Filing : 24 Nov 2022 )
(Arisen out of Order Dated 20/10/2022 in Case No. CC/201/2011 of District Cuttak)
 
1. The Manager, Cholamandalam MS General Insurance ,
Bhubaneswar, ashoknagar, At- 45/46, 2nd Floor, Bhubaneswar.
...........Appellant(s)
Versus
1. Smt. Smaranika Pratihari
Plot No. HIG-05, Gopabandhu Nagar, Jagatpur, Dist- Cuttack.
2. The Manager, Indus Ind Bank Ltd.,
No. 78, IInd Floor, Janapath , Kharvelnagar, Unit-III, Bhubaneswar.
3. The Manager, Unit of Aditya Car Automotives,
NH-5, Bamphakuda, Phulnakhara, Dist- Cuttack.
...........Respondent(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Dr. D.P. Choudhury PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MR. Pramode Kumar Prusty. MEMBER
 HON'BLE MS. Sudhiralaxmi Pattnaik MEMBER
 
PRESENT:M/S G.P.Dutta & Assoc., Advocate for the Petitioner 1
 
Dated : 04 Jan 2023
Final Order / Judgement

            Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.

           Defect is removed.

2.      Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he challenged the order dated. 20.10.2022 passed in EA No. 14 of 2019 arising out of C.C.No.201 of 2011 by the learned District Commission, Cuttack. According to him the impugned order  was complied as per Annexture-3.  The execution case was started vide execution application No. 14 of 2019. The final order was passed on 22.10.2013. Since the final order was complied, there is no necessity to pass the impugned order. Therefore, he submitted to set aside the impugned order.

3.      Considered the submission. Perused the impugned order. The impugned order passed by the learned District Commission is as follows:-

“ xxx   xxx   xxx

The Decree Holder has filed this application u/s 25 & 27 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 as the Judgment debtors had not complied to the final order dt. 22.10.2013, passed by this Commission in CC No. 201/2011. It reveals form the saidorder of this Commission that direction was issued only to the JDR No. 1 for complying the said order.

          The JDR no. 1 has filed his show cause. But on perusal of the show cause it is noticed that JDR No. 1 has not strictly adhered to the directions as issued by this commission. Hence, the show cause filed by the JDR no. 1 is not acceptable being incomplete. However, this Commission directs the JDR No. 1 to comply the order dt. 22.10.2013 as passed in CC No. 2010/2011 by this commission within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order, failing which legal action as deemed fit and proper to be initiated against the JDR No. 1 JDR No. 2 & 3 have no role to play in the case as no direction has been made against them.

Put up on 25.11.2022 awaiting full compliance of the order by the JDR No.1”.

4.      In view of the aforesaid order, it appears that the show cause of Jdr is considered by this Commission. We are not inclined to interfere with the impugned order. It is for the concerned District Commission to consider the execution application and dispose of same. Since the execution application is pending, we have nothing to say.

5.      The revision petition is disposed of accordingly.

 

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Dr. D.P. Choudhury]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Pramode Kumar Prusty.]
MEMBER
 
 
[HON'BLE MS. Sudhiralaxmi Pattnaik]
MEMBER
 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.