STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION ODISHA REVISION PETITION NO. SC/21/RP/137/2025 (Against the Order dated 5th December 2025 in Appeal No. DC/355/CC/318/2025 of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Jagatsinghapur)

WITH SC/21/IA/816/2025 (STAY)

BRANCH MANAGER TATA CAPITAL LTD BUSINESS ADDRESS - BEHIND KESHARI TALKIES, BHUBANESWAR, KHRUDAKHORDHA,ODISHA.

.......Petitioner(s)

Versus SUPRAVA MANJARI NAYAK S/o. Bholeswar Parida PRESENT ADDRESS - C/O RANJIT KUMAR PADHY,BIRIDI, JAGATSINGHPURJAGATSINGHAPUR,ODISHA.

.......Respondent(s)

BEFORE:

HON'BLE MR. DILIP KUMAR MOHAPATRA. , PRESIDING MEMBER HON'BLE MS. SUDHIRALAXMI PATTNAIK , MEMBER FOR THE PETITIONER:

ROHINI KANTA PATTANAIK (Advocate)

DATED: 12/02/2026

ORDER

Heard learned counsel for the revision petitioner.

2. The present revision petition has been filed challenging the order dated 05.12.2025 passed by the learned District Commission, Jagatsinghpur in IA No. 262 of 2025 arising out of CC No. 318 of 2025in which the learned District Commission has directed the financier, revision petitioner not to repossess the asset (vehicle) bearing Regd.No. OD-19-Y-8899 of the complainant on receipt of 30% of pending EMIs only from the complainant within 21 days (from the date of receipt of the order) and rest 20% of unpaid EMIs to be paid after one month of 1^st deposit of 30% (thus total 50% is to be paid) and further directed not to take any coercive action against the complainant in respect of the aforesaid vehicle till 29.12.2025 without leave of the Commission.

3. The revision petitioners have stated in revision petititon that there is an outstanding of Rs.3,33,500/- towards overdue instalment and Rs.44,320.44 towards overdue interest as on 15.12.2025 against the vehicle of the complainant but the complainant is not paying the outstanding dues.Learned counsel for the revision petitioners further submitted that they have already filed written version and objection to the IA No. 262/2025 before the learned District Commission and the consumer complaint is otherwise ready for hearing.

4. Till date Registry has not complied with the order dated 2.1.2026 of this Commission.

5. Counsel of revision petitioner today confined his prayer and prayed for a direction to the learned District Commission to dispose of the consumer complaint within a specified time.

6. Perused the records.

7. Taking into consideration the submission made by the learned counsel for the revision petitioner that the consumer complaint is ready for hearing without going through the merit of the revision petition, we direct the learned District Commission to dispose of the Consumer Complaint within a period of two months from the date of receipt of copy of this order giving due opportunity of hearing to all parties. The complainant is directed to pay the EMI dues as per the agreement. If the complainant fails to act in accordance to the agreement, it is open to the petitioner to initiate appropriate action for realisation of the EMI dues from the complainant as per the agreement in accordance with law and guidelines framed by Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Magma Fincorp Limited vrs. Rajesh Kumar Tiwari Reported in MANU/SC/0735/2020.

8. Accordingly, the revision petition is disposed of.

DILIP KUMAR MOHAPATRA.

PRESIDING MEMBER

SUDHIRALAXMI PATTNAIK

MEMBER