STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION HARYANA, PANCHKULA Date of Institution: 30.08.2022 Date of final hearing: 01.08.2023 Date of Pronouncement: 01.08.2023 REVISION PETITION NO.57 OF 2022 IN THE MATTER OF Mohini Traders (A House of Agencies), Distributors of Food & Cons. Goods, H.No.485/4, Near Dev Samaj Vidya Niketan School, New Colony, Gurugram (Haryana) through its proprietor Smt. Sunita Gogia, aged about

56 years w/o Sh. Ramesh Gogia.

….Petitioner/Complainant Versus

1. Tamilnad Mercantile Bank Limited, 514/7, Jawahar Nagar, New Railway Road, Near Modern Diagnostic Centre, Gurgaon-122001 (Haryana) through its Manager.

2. TMB Gurugram, vide agent Code: BKA 93020590000507, Insurance Agent through its Incharge, Insurance Cell, TMB, 514/7, Jawahar Nagar, New Railway Road, Near Modern Diagnostic Centre, Gururgram-122001.

3. United India Insurance Co. Ltd., 4, New Colony, Upon SBI, Gurugram-122001 (Hr. ) through its Sr. Divisional Manager.

….Respondents/Opposite Parties CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE T.P.S. MANN, PRESIDENT MS. MANJULA, MEMBER Present: Shri Sumesh Mahajan, proxy counsel for Shri Saurav Tyagi, counsel for the petitioner.

Shri Nishant Khatri, proxy counsel for Shri Kamal Sharma, counsel for respondents No.1 and 2.

None for respondent No.3.

PER: T.P.S. MANN, J.

ORDER

1. The present revision has been preferred by complainant Mohini Traders under Section 47(1)(b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 for issuance of directions to the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Gurgaon for deciding the application under Section 38(8) of the Act filed by the complainant on merits in a time bound manner expeditiously.

2. On 05.09.2022, after hearing counsel for the petitioner, notice of the revision was issued to the respondents through registered post and on subsequent date i.e. 15.09.2022, the respondents were duly represented. On the adjourned date i.e. 15.09.2022, the State Commission had passed the following orders:

“The complainant has filed the present revision under Section 47(1)(b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 for calling for the records and issuing appropriate directions to the District Consumer Commission, Gurgaon in C.C. No.454 of 2021 for deciding the application under Section 38(8) of the Act filed by the complainant on merits in a time bound manner.

Counsel for the opposite parties states that the jurisdiction of Civil Court to entertain any suit or proceeding in respect of any matter which a Debts Recovery Tribunal or the Appellate Tribunal is empowered by or under this Act to determine is barred and no injunction could be granted by any court or other authority in respect of any action taken or to be taken in pursuance of any power conferred by or under this Act or under the Recovery of Debts due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (51 of 1993).

On the other hand, counsel for the petitioner while placing reliance upon Section 38(8) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 states that during the pendency of any proceeding before the District Consumer Commission, if it appears necessary, it may pass such interim order as is just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.

It is an admitted fact that after issuance of notice and filing of written version by the opposite parties, both the parties have almost recorded their evidence and the complaint is now at the stage of hearing final arguments.

Counsel for the petitioner states that 64 square yards house belonging to the complainant/petitioner is likely to be auctioned today at 3 P.M and in case the auction takes place, he would be left with no residential property.

Without going into the merits of the case and the stands taken by the parties, the State Commission is of the view that District Consumer Commission can pass such interim order as is just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.

Adjourned to 10.11.2022 for further hearing.

In the meantime, the residential property held by the petitioner/complainant be not auctioned.’’