Sri Subhra Sankar Bhatta, Presiding Member

Order No. 09

Ld. Counsel appearing for the Revisionists/Petitioners is present.

 Today is fixed for ex parte hearing of the Revision Petition.

The Revision Petition is taken up for ex parte hearing.

Perused the entire contention of the Revision Petition and the relief/reliefs sought for.

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Revisionists/Petitioners at length and in full.

Considered.

The present Revision Petition has been preferred by the Revisionists/Petitioners viz. 1) Sri Shanti Kumar Das and 2) Smt. Aparna Das challenging the impugned order dated 04.03.2022 passed by the Ld. District Commission at Howrah in connection with consumer complaint case no. 175 of 2021 whereby Ld. District Commission was pleased to pass the following order:

“ In view of the above discussion and considering the materials on record, we are of the view that though prima facie on 23.08.2021 we passed an interim order in favour of the Complainants/Petitioners, but after postmorteming the application under Section 38 (8) of the C.P. Act,2019 of the Complainants/Petitioners and the W.O. filed by the OPs including the copies of various documents we are constrained to hold that the application under Section 38(8) of the C.P. Act, 2019 the Complainants/Petitioners is liable to be rejected and in no way the interim order dated 23.08.2021 can be extended and thus the application under Section 38(8) of the C.P. Act, 2019 is hereby rejected.

To 25.05.2022 for evidence of Complainants/Petitioners by way of affidavit.”

In the body of the Revision Petition the Revisionists/Petitioners have contended that the Ld. District Commission acted illegally and with material irregularity in vacating the ad interim order dated 23.08.2021 passed in the CC case; that the Ld. District Commission was wrong in considering the sanctioned letter dated 13.04.2006 issued by the concerned Bank; that the Ld. District Commission was wrong in observing that due to floating rate of interest it comes up and down causing debit balance in the loan account of the Revisionists/Petitioners; that the Ld. District Commission ought to have held that the previous interim order was befitting and indispensible for just and effective adjudication of the complaint case.  On all such grounds the Revisionists/Petitioners have prayed for allowing the present Revision Petition after setting aside the order impugned.

Despite service of notice the Respondent/Bank did not turn up to contest the present Revision Petition.  Consequently, the Revision Petition was proceeded ex parte.

I have meticulously gone through the impugned order dated 04.03.2022 vide order no. 18 passed by the Ld. District Commission.  In my considered opinion the observation and ultimate conclusion of the Ld. Commission below are absolutely correct and justified in the eye of law.  Practically, I do not find any illegality, irregularity and propriety of the impugned order.  After considering all aspects from all angles and having considered the submissions of both sides the Ld. Commission below arrived at the conclusion and rightly rejected the application of the Complainants under Section 38(8) of the C.P. Act, 2019.  It is apparent from the findings of the Ld. Commission below that due to floating rate of interest (ups and downs) the Complainants` loan account has the reflection of debit balance.  Prima facie it can be safely concluded that the Complainants have the liability to clear the housing loan along with accrued interest thereon to the concerned Bank. 

Thus, being the position I have no hesitation to hold that the impugned order of the Ld. Commission below does not deserve interference of this Hon`ble State Commission.  The said order requires to be sustained in the eye of law.

Thus, the Revision Petition fails.

It is, therefore,

O R D E R E D

That the present Revision Petition being no. RP/40/2022 be and the same is dismissed ex parte against the Respondents but considering the circumstances without any order as to costs.

The impugned order dated 04.03.2022 vide order no. 18 passed by the Ld. District Commission in consumer complaint case no. CC/175/2021 is hereby affirmed.

Interim stay, if any, be vacated forthwith.

Let a copy of this order be transmitted to the Ld. Commission below forthwith for information and taking necessary action.