No. 3/11.08.2009.

HON’BLE JUSTICE SRI A. CHAKRABARTI, PRESIDENT.

Heard Mr. Soumen Roy Chowdhury, the Ld. Advocate for the Revision Petitioner and Mr. Barun Prasad, the Ld. Advocate opposing the revision.  This proceeding has arisen out of a complaint case whereby the Complainant has asked for a direction upon O.P. No. 1 financier to release relevant papers, documents and vehicle along with all belongings to the Petitioner, and to pay compensation and for other relief.  In view of the factual background wherein the Petitioner purchased vehicles being financed by the O.P. No. 1 and the O.P. No. 1 took possession of the vehicle, the grievance of the Petitioner is that without any notice such possession has been taken.

After the complaint case was initiated on 08.04.2009 the Forum below passed an interim order relevant portion of which is as follows : “Hence ordered that the O.P. No. 1 is directed to release the vehicle No.-WB-04-1466 kept under its custody in favour of the complainant.  The above interim order shall take immediate effect and will remain valid till the next date fixed for hearing of the Petn u/s.-13(3B) of the Act filed by the complainant.  To 08/05/2009 for S/R and Appearance of the O.Ps. and also for hearing of the petition”.

By the impugned order dated 19.06.2009 the Forum below considered the matter and ordering portion is as follows :

“The complainant in his petition u/s-13(3B) prayed for such other order as may be considered fit by the Forum. in the earlier context the interim order was issued directing the O.Ps. to release the vehicle No.-WB-04-1466 in favour of the complainant.  In the backdrop of the present situation we consider it just and proper to modify the interim order by further directing the O.Ps. not to dispose of or sell the vehicle in any manner whatsoever.  This order alongwith that of 08/04/2009 shall remain valid till the disposal of the P.O.C. To 06/07/2009 for showing cause in terms of order dated 08/05/2009”.

Considering both the orders we are satisfied that the order dated 08.04.2009 stood modified by order dated 19.06.2009.  We find it is difficult to give effect to both the orders as by the first order direction was given to the O.P. to release the vehicle and by the subsequent order direction has been given to the O.P. not to dispose or sale the vehicle in any manner whatsoever.  We find from the second order i.e. order dated 19.06.2009 the Forum also recorded that it considered just and proper to modify the interim order by further directing the O.P. not to dispose or sale the vehicle in any manner whatsoever.  Therefore, we feel that the fact that the first order dated 08.04.2009 is no more there and interim order prevailing is the order dated 19.06.2009.  With the above clarification the revision petition is disposed of .