1. The petitioner has sought quashing of the proceedings of execution case (EA) no. 41 of 2018 arising out of C.C. no. 80 of 2016 including orders dated 13th December, 2019, 22nd September 2022 and subsequent orders till the order dated 28th March, 2024.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner was never made a party in the case before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (in short the Consumer Forum) or the execution case. The private opposite party entered into an agreement with the petitioner for purchasing a tractor on 20th November, 2013 upon payment of an advance of Rs. 10,000/- out of total consideration of Rs. 7,78,710/-. At the time of the delivery of the vehicle, the opposite party paid Rs. 5,30,000/- by taking loan of the said amount from L&T Finance and a sum of Rs. 2,18,716/- was due. It was agreed that the registration certificate and other relevant documents pertaining to the vehicle would be made over to the private opposite party upon clearance of the entire due amount. The private opposite party paid Rs. 1,93,000/- to the petitioner at different times and Rs. 25,716/- was due. The private opposite party failed to pay the monthly instalments to the finance company (L&T) for which the company took possession of the vehicle upon execution of a surrender letter by the opposite party on 20th May, 2015. The finance company sold out the vehicle to one Shib Nath Das who is the present owner thereof.

3. The private opposite party filed a complaint before the Consumer Forum under S.11/12 of the Consumer Protection Act which was registered as Consumer Case no. 80 of 2016. The private opposite party sought a direction upon the respondent therein to hand over the registration certificate of the tractor and also release the tractor and trailor in his favour. He further claimed compensation to the tune of Rs. 4,00,000/- and litigation expenses. The complaint was filed against the branch manager, S&S Automobiles, Bilshara Road Branch, Police Station - Pandua, District: - Hooghly. The case was contested by the respondent therein and by an order passed on 27th July, 2018, the Forum directed the respondent to issue / hand over the registration certificate of the tractor after receiving the due amount from the complainant to the tune of Rs. 25,716/- within 30 days from the date of the order. Execution case being EA 41 of 2018 was filed by the private opposite party and warrant of arrest issued against the petitioner vide order dated 13th December, 2019.

4. The legal issue involved herein is as to whether the Consumer Forum has the authority to issue warrant of arrest against the judgment debtor / the petitioner in the execution proceeding. The petitioner has claimed that he was not impleaded as a party in the consumer case or in the execution case and learnt about the same only when warrant of arrest was issued. The case has been filed against the branch manager, S&S Automobiles whereas the petitioner is the sole proprietor of S&S Automobiles. The said fact was brought to the knowledge of the Consumer Forum by the officer in charge, Pandua Police Station in the execution case on 22nd September, 2022. Since learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that this issue is being agitated before the Hon'ble State Commission, this Court refrains from making any comment on this issue.

5. With regard to the issue as to whether the Consumer Forum can issue warrant of arrest in an execution proceeding, the issue has been elaborately dealt with by a coordinate Bench of this Court in a judgment delivered on 12th August, 2022 in CRR 2955 of 2022. The learned Bench has held that in an execution application the Commission cannot issue warrant of arrest in enforcement of its order. The Commission can issue warrant for detention of the judgment debtor in civil prison in accordance with the provision laid down under the Code of Civil Procedure.

6. To elaborate, S.71 of the Consumer Protection Act, 198