BEFORE THE HON'BLE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION MAHARASHTRA STATE AT MUMBAI APPEAL NO. SC/27/AE/13/2026 (Against the Final Order dated 20-11-2025 passed by Learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, South Mumbai in EA No.10/2022 filed u/s. 72, C.P. Act2019)

Ms. Daevi Prakash Sheth, R/at: 1103-Sulsa Apartment, 254-Ridge Road, Malbar Hill, Mumbai – 400006. ……… Appellant (Original Complainant)

Versus

1. Mr. Rameshkumar Gordhanbhai Kathiria

2. Mrs. Heenaben Rameshkumar Kathiria, Both residing at E-301, Swastic Tower, Sarthana Jakatnaka, Varachha Road, Surat – 395006. ….…. Respondent (Original Respondent/ Original Accused)

BEFORE:

Justice Mr. S.P. Tavade, Hon’ble President Mr. Vijay C. Premchandani, Hon’ble Member Appearance:

Advocate for Appellant : Advocate Balasaheb Deshmukh - ORAL ORDER:-

(Dated : 09-02-2026)

Per: Hon’ble Mr. Vijay C. Premchandani, Member

1. The present Appeal against the Execution order is filed by the Original Complainant under section 73 of Consumer Protection Act 2019 against the order dated 20-11-2025 by the Learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, South Mumbai in Execution Application No.10 of 2022 filed under section 72 of Consumer Protection Act 2019 against the present Respondent.

Facts of the case.

2. The Appellant has file the Consumer Complaint No.CC/21/99 against the present Respondent before Learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, South Mumbai which came be allowed in favour the Complainant vide final order/ judgment dated 28-02-2022 which came to be slightly modified by a Corrigendum order dated 25-04-2022.

3. It is contended that, the Opponent failed and neglected to comply the said order. Hence the Appellant has filed criminal execution No. EA/10/2022 before Learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, South Mumbai on 06-06-2022 under section 72 of Consumer Protection Act 2019. It is contended that, the summons was sent to the Accused under section 200 of CrPC, after detail verification and statement of the Complainant. The summons was sent through the concern police station, on enquiry at the given address mentioned in the original complaint/ execution application, it reveals that the house of Accused is locked. On enquiry it is been informed that the Accused shifted from the said address, summons could not be served. The Commission has recorded in the order sheet that, the accused have left India and have absconded abroad. The Complainant has moved an application on 29-11-2022 for issuing standing NBW against both the accused, the said application allowed and directed Registrar to issue Standing NBW and forward them to the DCP, Zone-4, Mumbai for execution. However, as the accused persons had already absconded abroad, the DCP, Zone-4 could not execute the NBW. Thereafter, from 23-01-2023 to 12-04-2024 the matter was listed on various occasions and was adjourned for awaiting warrant report. Finally on 20-11-2025 the matter was dismissed quoting reason that, the present Execution Petition cannot kept pending indefinitely when enforcement despite of the proper efforts.

4. It is further contended in the order sheet that, the Court cannot be burdened with futile and perpetual execution proceeding and where enforcement become impossible. It is further contended in the order, the Execution application filed under section 72 of the Consumer Protection 2019 was disposed of with direction of administrative. The said direction was given the Registrar as well as Decree Holder.

5. Being aggrieved he said order the present Appellant preferred appear under section 73 of Consumer Protection Act 2019 on following grounds.

6. It is contended in the grounds of Appeal that, the Commission cannot issue such directions in absence of any jurisdiction contemplated under the Consumer Protection Act 2019. The Look out notice (LON) and Red Corner Notice (RCN) already issued by the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Zone-4, Mumbai. Further it is contended that, accordin