Sudarshana Batra Vs Amit Arora President Dist Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Faridabad

Present contempt petition has b een filed alleging violation of order dat e d 18.07.2024 (Annexure P-1) passed by a co-ordinate Bench of this Cour t in CWP-14616-2024 titled as “Sudarshna Batra vs. District Consume r Disputes Redressal Commiss i on, Faridabad and others”, whereby t h e District Consumer Disputes Re d ressal Commission, Faridabad was dire c ted to decide Execution Application No. 79 of 2023 as expeditio u sly as possible and preferably w ithin a period of four months from the d ate fixed before it.

¶16

A perusal of the aforesaid order shows that the direction issued by the writ Court was essentially to ensure expeditious disposal of the execu t ion proceedings pending before t h e District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Faridabad.

¶17

VIJAY ASIJA 2026.05.14 08.23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶18

2

¶19

COCP-112-2025 (O & M)

¶20

Learned counsel appearing o n behalf of the respondents submits t h at the petitioner had initially file d a consumer complaint before the Distri c t Consumer Disputes Redressal C ommission, Faridabad, which came to b e allowed vide order dated 21.03.2023. It is further submitted that the appea l preferred by the respondents bef o re the learned State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission stood dismissed vide order dated 24.03.202 5 .

¶21

Learned counsel further sub m its that against the aforesaid order, the respondents have already filed S e cond Appeal No. 257 of 2025 before th e National Consumer Disputes R e dressal Commission, which is presently p ending adjudication. It is also su b mitted that during pendency of the afores a id proceedings, the petitioner ha d approached this Court by way of CWP-14616-2024 seeking a direction for expeditious disposal of Execution Application No. 79 of 2023, whe r ein the order dated 18.07.2024 came to b e passed.

¶22

It h as further been brought to the notice of this Court that the responde n ts had challenged the order dat e d 18.07.2024 by filing LPA1889-202 5 , which came to be dismissed vide order dated 07.07.2025. Against t h e same, the respondents have file d Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary No. 75464 of 2025 titled as “Haryan a Shehri Vikas Pradhikaran and others vs. Sudarshana Batra and another” before the Hon’ble Supreme Court, in which, vide order dated 02.2.2 0 26, it has been directed that “…the re s pondents make a prayer to the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission to decide the Seco n d Appeal No.257 of 2025 as expeditio u sly as possible”.

¶23

Learned counsel for the res p ondents further submits that pursuant t o the aforesaid observations m a de by the Hon’ble Supreme

¶24

VIJAY ASIJA 2026.05.14 08.23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶25

3

¶26

COCP-112-2025 (O & M)

¶27

Court, an appropriate application has alr e ady been moved before the National C onsumer Disputes Redressal Co m mission and the matter is now stated to be fixed for final arguments on 25. 0 5.2026.

¶28

This Court has considered the submissions made by learned counsel f o r the parties and perused the recor d .

¶29

At this stage, it cannot be s a id that there is any wilful or deliberate disobedience of the order passed by the writ Court, particularly when the matter is presently pending con s ideration before the National Consume r Disputes Redressal Commission a nd proceedings are stated to be moving f o rward for final adjudication. The r e spondents have also placed on record th e subsequent developments inclu d ing pendency of proceedings before th e Hon’ble Supreme Court and th e directions issued therein for expeditio u s disposal of the second appea l pending before the National Consume r Disputes Redressal Commission.

¶30

In view of the above facts, an d since the second appeal itself is now fi x ed for final arguments before th e National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission on 25.05.2026, no fu r ther direction is required to be issued.

¶31

Accordingly, the present conte m pt petition is disposed of . Rule stands discharged. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand(s) disposed of.

¶32

Whether s p eaking/reasoned Yes / No Whether R e portable Yes / No

¶33

VIJAY ASIJA 2026.05.14 08.23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Sudarshana Batra v. Amit Arora President Dist Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Faridabad

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sudarshana Batra v. Amit Arora President Dist Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Faridabad

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kala Singh Vs Harbans Kaur

Kavita and Ors. Vs Vinod and Ors.

Mewa Singh Vs Gurvinde Singh and Others

Jawahar Lal Vs Pushpinder Kumar

Sandeep Singh and Others Vs Kumar Rahul and Others

Sukhdev Singh and Ors. Vs Shyamal Misra and Ors.