Allowed

Sibar Media and Entertainment Ltd., v. The Honble District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum - II

Telangana HC17 Jul 2013WP/20496/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Division Bench set aside impugned orders dismissing applications to recall Non-Bailable Warrants issued against petitioners who failed to pay consumer forum awards, directing the Forum to reconsider the applications after hearing both parties in light of petitioners' offer to pay full dues.

What did the court decide?

Impugned orders dismissing applications for recall of Non-Bailable Warrants set aside; Forum directed to reconsider applications after hearing both parties.

Sibar Media and Entertainment Ltd., Vs The Honble… — Consumer Protection | Telangana HC (2013)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SRI N.V. RAMANA and

¶2

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR

¶3

Writ Petition Nos.20496, 20497 & 20498 of 2013

¶4

DATED: 17..07..2013

¶5

Between:

¶6

Sibar Media And Entertainment Ltd., Pipula Road Junction, Ajitsingh Nagar, Vijayawada & Another.

¶7

… Petitioners

¶8

And

¶9

The Hon’ble District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-II, Krishna at Vijayawada, rep. by its President & Others.

¶10

… Respondents

¶11

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SRI N.V. RAMANA and

¶12

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR Writ Petition Nos.20496, 20497 & 20498 of 2013 COMMON ORDER:(Per the Hon’ble Sri Justice Sri N.V. Ramana)

¶13

These three writ petitions are filed against the orders

¶14

dt.25-06-2013 passed by the 1^st Respondent-District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (hereinafter referred to ‘the Forum’), dismissing the petitions made by the writ petitioners to recall the Non-Bailable Warrants issued against them.

¶15

2. The petitioners herein have suffered an order in C.C.Nos.99, 100 and 101 of 2007. Since the petitioners did not pay the amount as awarded by the Forum, the applicants filed penalty petitions, which are numbered as PP.Nos. 45, 46 and 47 of 2008. It appears that non-bailable warrants are issued for nonappearance of the petitioners before the Forum. The petitioners there after filed petitions seeking recall of the said warrants and also filed an affidavit stating the grounds for which they could not appear earlier, and further stating that the petitioners are ready to pay the entire amount due and payable to the respondents/ complainants, as per the orders of the Forum. The said applications, however, were dismissed by the Forum by the impugned order dated 25.06.2013, against which the present writ petitions are filed.

¶16

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners, however, fairly submits that the petitioners are ready and willing to pay the entire amount as per the award passed by the Forum to the claimants and to show their bona fides, the petitioners produced three photocopies of the Demand Drafts bearing Nos.259906, 259907 and 249908 dt. 17.05.2013 for Rs.70,000/- each. The learned counsel for the petitioners states that the said amounts represent the entire amount due and payable to the complainants/respondents, and if there is any short fall over and above the said amounts, the petitioners hereby undertake to pay the said balance, as per the directions of the Forum. Therefore, the learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the Forum

¶17

have not considered the said aspect of payment of full amount due while considering the applications to recall the Warrants issued against the petitioners. Therefore, the learned counsel submits that there is sufficient cause for setting aside the impugned orders.

¶18

4. In view of the order proposed to be passed, we do not think it is necessary to issue notice to the respondents, which takes care of the interest of the claimants also.

¶19

5. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the Government Pleader, keeping in view the bone fides expressed by the petitioners and as the issue involved is only with respect to payment of the awarded amounts by the petitioners to the respondents herein, instead of dragging the petitioners to further proceedings, we deem it appropriate to set aside the impugned orders passed by the Forum and direct the Forum to reconsider the petitioners’ applications for recalling the NonBailable Warrants together with their offer to pay the full amount payable by them to the respondents/complainants and the undertaking to abide by the directions, if any, to be issued by the Forum in that regard. The Forum shall consider the re-call applications, as stated above, after hearing both the parties and pass appropriate orders so as to give quietus to this litigation.

¶20

6. The writ petitions are accordingly disposed of. As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall stand closed accordingly. No costs.

¶21

N.V. RAMANA, J

¶22

VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR,J

¶23

Dt. 17..07.2013 Kv

¶24

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SRI N.V. RAMANA and THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR

¶25

Writ Petition Nos.20496, 20497 & 20498 of 2013

¶26

(COMMON ORDER of the Division Bench delivered by the Hon’ble Sri Justice Sri N.V. Ramana)

¶27

17..07..2013

¶28

Sibar Media and Entertainment Ltd., v. The Honble District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum - II

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sibar Media and Entertainment Ltd., v. The Honble District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum - II

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Lankapalli Srinivasa Rao S/o Suryanarayana Vs The Assistant Director of Survey and Settlements

N.Apparao Vs The Assistant Director of Mines and Geology

Government of Andhra Pradesh, Vs M/s Parameshwara Fertilizers Pvt. Ltd.

Bheemsetty Naveen Kumar Vs The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation

Sibar Media and Entertainment Ltd., Vs The Honble District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum -

Sibar Media and Entertainment Ltd., Vs The Honble District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum -Ii