The High Court will not interfere with coercive measures like non-bailable warrants issued by a Consumer Commission in execution proceedings if the Commission is satisfied that the judgment debtors are intentionally evading service and avoiding appearance.

WRIT PETITION NO. 13511 OF 2026 (GM-CON)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 23.10.2025, 24.11L.2025 AND 29.01L.2026 (ANNEXURE A SERIES) PASSED BY THE KARNATAKA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION IN EXECUTION APPLICATION No. 158 / 2019 AND ANY CONSEQUENT WARRANTS FOR ARRESTS OR PROCLAMATIONS ISSUED AGAINST THE PETITIONERS.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K

ORAL ORDER

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM)

The present caption petition is filed calling in question the legality and correctness of the orders dated 23.10.2025, 24.11.2025 and 29.01.2026 passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Karnataka (for short, ‘the Commission’) in the execution proceedings. By the impugned orders, the Commission, on noticing that the present petitioners, who are arrayed as judgment debtors in the execution petition, were consistently evading service of notice and were not appearing before the Commission despite sufficient opportunity, has proceeded to order issuance of proclamation and thereafter directed issuance of non-bailable warrant against the petitioners for securing their presence before the Commission. Aggrieved by the said orders, the petitioners are before this Court in the present proceedings.

2. We have heard the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners and have carefully perused the material available on record.

3. Having considered the submissions made and on perusal of the impugned orders, we are not persuaded to entertain the petition insofar as the challenge made to the order directing issuance of proclamation and the consequential non-bailable warrant. The records would indicate that the execution proceedings are pending before the Commission and the impugned coercive measures have been resorted to only after the Commission recorded its satisfaction that the judgment debtors/Petitioners were avoiding appearance before it. In that view of the matter, no case is made out warranting interference by this Court in exercise of its extraordinary jurisdiction.

4. At this juncture, learned Senior Counsel, on instructions from the instructing counsel, submits that the petitioners undertake to appear before the Commission in the pending execution proceedings on the next date of hearing without fail and shall fully cooperate with the further proceedings before the Commission.

5. Recording the aforesaid submission and undertaking made on behalf of the petitioners, and taking note of the fact that coercive steps are presently contemplated pursuant to the impugned orders, this Court is inclined to grant limited protection to the petitioners so as to enable them to appear before the Commission and participate in the proceedings.

6. Accordingly, the operation and execution of the order dated 24.11.2025, insofar as it directs coercive action against the petitioners, shall remain suspended till the next date of hearing before the Commission. It is made clear that the petitioners shall positively appear before the Commission on the next date of hearing without seeking any unnecessary adjournment. In the event of failure on the part of the petitioners to appear before the Commission as undertaken before this Court, it shall be open to the Commission to proceed further in accordance with law and take all such coercive steps as are permissible in law.

7. With the aforesaid observations, the petition stands disposed of