Orissa High Court
Amarnath Pradhan vs Prabir Kumar Dey & Others .... Opposite ... on 3 July, 2023
Author: S.K. Panigrahi
Bench: S.K. Panigrahi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No.20392 of 2023
Amarnath Pradhan .... Petitioner
Mr.Prafulla Ku.Rath,Sr. Adv.
-versus-
Prabir Kumar Dey & others .... Opposite Parties
CORAM:
DR. JUSTICE S.K. PANIGRAHI
Order ORDER
No. 03.07.2023
02. 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid
arrangement.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.
3. The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking direction from this Court to set aside the order dated 22.06.2023 passed by the President, State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Odisha, Cuttack in C.C No. 24 of 2021 under Annexure-1.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner's son who was running a proprietor organization, had entered into an agreement with opposite party wherein the clause-5 reveals that " both the parties agree that during the course of said Signature Not Verified Page 1 of 4 Digitally Signed Signed by: LINGARAJ BEHERA Designation: Sr. Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: Orissa High Court, Cuttack Date: 05-Jul-2023 17:40:55 // 2 // transaction(s), if any amount would remain outstanding on any of the party and if any party would fail to make payment of the outstanding dues, the other party shall proceed in any court of law to recover the amount out of his share of the movable and immovable property of the family for satisfaction of the said party."
5. As per above clause , the opposite party No.1 should have approached the appropriate court i.e. Civil court by filing suit. However, the opposite party has erroneously approached the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Orissa, Cuttack. The said Commission has render a judgment dated 22nd June, 2023 wherein the opposite party was directed to pay Rs. 96,00,000/- as compensation to the complainant within forty five days failing which it would attract 9% interest per annum.
6. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the opposite parties have failed to acknowledge the fact that the petitioner's concern was of sole trade organization where the sole trader is required to be a party and unfortunately in the present case the a sole trader is dead. Despite the fact was brought before the Commission, the Commission went away with passing the impugned order which is completely against Signature Not Verified Page 2 of 4 Digitally Signed Signed by: LINGARAJ BEHERA Designation: Sr. Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: Orissa High Court, Cuttack Date: 05-Jul-2023 17:40:55 // 3 // the cannons of law and the order passed by the State Consumer Commission is contrary to the law. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that in view of judgment passed by the Apex Court on 13th May, 2022 reported in 2022 SCC OnLine SC 620 this Court can also entertain any kind of cases of this nature. The relevant Paragraph-27 of the said judgment is extracted hereunder:
" In view of the above, in the present case, the High court has not committed any error in entertaining the writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the order passed by the National Commission which has been passed in an appeal under Section 58(1)(a)(iii) of the 2019 Act. We are in complete agreement with the view taken by the High Court. However, at the same time, it goes without saying that while exercising the powers under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the High Court subjects itself to the rigour of Article 227 of the Constitution and the High Court has to exercise the jurisdiction under Article 227 within the parameters within which such jurisdiction is required to be exercised."
7. In such view of the matter, issue notice to the opposite party No. 1 by Registered Post with A.D./Speed Post. Requisites shall be filed within five working days.
8. List this matter on 10th August, 2023. Signature Not Verified Page 3 of 4 Digitally Signed Signed by: LINGARAJ BEHERA Designation: Sr. Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: Orissa High Court, Cuttack Date: 05-Jul-2023 17:40:55 // 4 // I.A. No. 9678 of 2023
9. Heard.
10. As an interim measure, there shall be stay of operation of the order dated 22.06.2023 passed by the President, State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Odisha, Cuttack in C.C. No. 24 of 2021 under Annexure-1 till the next date.
( Dr. S.K. Panigrahi) Judge LB Signature Not Verified Page 4 of 4 Digitally Signed Signed by: LINGARAJ BEHERA Designation: Sr. Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: Orissa High Court, Cuttack Date: 05-Jul-2023 17:40:55