Friday, December 19, 2025

Affidavit in Opposition to the application under Section 72 of the Consumer Protection Act’ 2019, by the Judgment Debtors

 

Before the Hon’ble District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, South 24 Parganas

Amantran Bazar, 3rd Floor, Baruipur,

Kolkata – 700144

 

DC/304/EA/36/2025

{Arising out of DC/304/CC/131/2011}

 

                                                          In the matter of;

Smt. Alaka Roy, Wife of Sri Tapan Kumar Roy, residing at Premises being no. E-2, Tagore Park, Laskarhat, Post Office – Tiljala, Police Station – Kasba, Kolkata – 700039.

                   ______Complainant / Decree Holder

 

-      Versus –

 

1.   M/s. Om Tara Maa Construction, a Partnership Fir, having its Office at Premises being No. Block – E-6, Tagore Park Maine Road, Police Station – Tiljala, Police Station – Tiljala, Kolkata – 700039.

 

2.   Sri Santanu Kanjilal, Son of Sri Gouranga Kanjilal, residing at Premises being no. 149/F, Picnic Garden Road, Police Station – Tiljala, Kolkata – 700039.

 

3.   Sri Sanjib Das, Son of Late Sankar Chandra Das, residing at Premises being no. E-6, Tagore Park, Police Station – Tiljala, Kolkata – 700039.

 

_______Opposite Parties / Judgment Debtors

 

Affidavit in Opposition to the application under Section 72 of the Consumer Protection Act’ 2019, by the Judgment Debtors;

 

The humble petition of the above named Opposite Parties / Judgment Debtors, most respectfully;

 

Showeth as under;

 

1.   That the Judgment Debtors are in receipt of the Notice given under Section 223(1) BNSS 2023, referring the above noted Execution application. The said notice stated that a complaint has been filed against the Judgment Debtor under Section 72 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, regarding failure by the Judgment Debtors for complying the Final Order of the Hon’ble Commission in Consumer Case No. CC/131/2011, dated 29/06/2012. The said notice further directed to appear before the Hon’ble Commission for the purpose of pre-cognizance hearing, on this day, i.e. 22/12/2025.

 

Photostat copy of the said Notice given under Section 223(1) BNSS 2023, is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure – “A”

 

2.   That the Judgment Debtors astonished while received the said notice under Section 223(1) BNSS 2023, about an application under Section 72 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. It is pertinent to states that earlier one Execution application being No. EA/183/2013, arising out of Complaint Case No. CC/11/131, has been initiated by the Decree Holder / Complainant, under Section 25 & 27 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, wherein in the part of payments has been complied by the Judgment Debtors, herein. Save and except the Completion Certificate in respect of the Building premises from the Kolkata Municipal Corporation, all other directions has been duly performed and complied thereof.

 

3.   That the handing over the Completion Certificate of the building premises from the Kolkata Municipal Corporation, is still awaiting, since the same is beyond the control of the Judgment Debtors, even after the Judgment Debtors have every intentions and willingness to comply with the directions of the Hon’ble Commission in respect of the Completion Certificate of the building premises.

 

4.   That the Hon’ble State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, West Bengal, by order dated 12.02.2020, allowed the appeal being A/594/2019, and set aside Order No. 66 dated 22.07.2019 of the District Forum, holding that the issuance of a warrant of arrest against the judgment-debtors was illegal and procedurally improper as it was passed without giving them any opportunity of hearing. The Hon’ble Commission found that the original District Forum order had already been modified in appeal no. F.A. No. 448 of 2012, on 25.04.2013, and therefore execution could not proceed on the basis of the unmodified order or for amounts that had been set aside. It was further held that non-issuance of the Completion Certificate and mutation was not attributable to the appellants, as related proceedings were pending before the Municipal Building Tribunal and the Hon’ble High Court, and substantial compliance with the modified order had already been made. Accordingly, the District Forum was directed not to pass any coercive or harsh order against the appellants until disposal of the pending High Court proceedings.

 

Photostat copy of the order dated 12.02.2020, passed in the appeal being A/594/2019, is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure – “B”

 

5.   That the operative portion of the said order dated 12.02.2020, passed in the appeal being A/594/2019, is reproduced herein as follows; “Ld. DCDRF is requested not to pass any harsh order against the Jdrs./O.Ps. till the disposal of the case being C.O. No.4034 of 2015, pending before Hon’ble High Court”.

 

6.   That the same has been placed before the Hon’ble Commission, and on due pursuance thereof, the Hon’ble Commission has duly recorded the contents and purports of the said order dated 12.02.2020, passed in the appeal being A/594/2019, by the Hon’ble State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, West Bengal, vide its Order dated 19/02/2020, in the Execution Application No. EA/183/2013, arising out of Complaint Case No. CC/11/131, and thereafter the dates were fixed for awaiting the Order from the Hon’ble High Court Calcutta in C.O. no. 4034 of 2015.

 

Photostat copy of the Order dated 19/02/2020, in the Execution Application No. EA/183/2013, arising out of Complaint Case No. CC/11/131, is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure – “C”.

 

7.   That thereafter all of a sudden the Judgment Debtors were in receipt of a notice regarding institution of a Writ Petition given by the Learned Advocate for the Decree Holder Smt. Alaka Roy, in the month of February’ 2025. The said Writ Petition was instituted as WPA No. 3971 of 2025, before the Hon’ble High Court Calcutta, wherein the above facts were contended. The said Writ Petition was heard at first on 25-03-2025, by the Hon’ble Justice Amrita Sinha, and passed the necessary order on 25-03-2025, which are as follows;

 

“1. The petitioner in this writ petition challenges an order passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum.

 

2. It appears that the matter relates to issuance of a completion certificate by the Kolkata Municipal Corporation.

 

4.     It is submitted that the completion certificate cannot be issued allegedly because of pendency of a civil revisional application being CO No. 4034 of 2015 before this Court.

 

5.     It will be open for the petitioner to press for hearing of the said civil revisional application.

 

6.     The Writ petition is mad returnable on May 14, 2025.

 

7.     Affidavit of service is taken on record.

 

8.     All parties are to act on the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this court.”

 

Photostat copy of the notice with the said Writ Petition being WPA No. 3971 of 2025 with all annexure and the Order dated 25-03-2025, are collectively annexed herewith and marked as Annexure – “D”.

 

8.   That subsequently, the said Writ Petition being WPA No. 3971 of 2025 (Alaka Roy – Versus – The State of West Bengal & Others), appeared in the list of the Hon’ble Judtice Amrita Sinha, and same has been taken up for hearing on 19-05-2025, and duly observed that the said Civil Revision application is still pending before the Hon’ble High Court Calcutta, therefore the said writ petition has been de-listed for the time being with a liberty to mention for enlistment on conclusion of the civil revision application. The said writ petition is still pending before the Hon’ble High Court Calcutta, which stated that the Civil Revision is still pending.

 

Photostat copy of the Order dated 19-05-2025, passed in WPA No. 3971 of 2025, is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure – “E”.

 

9.   That therefore, the said Civil Revision being C.O. no. 4034 of 2015, and the Writ Petition being WPA No. 3971 of 2025, are still pending before the Hon’ble High Court Calcutta. It is pertinently states that the Decree Holder is party in both the proceedings before the Hon’ble High Court Calcutta and thus aware about the pendency and observation made therein by and before the Hon’ble High Court Calcutta.

 

10.                That the present proceeding being the above referred Execution application has been persuaded under Section 72 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, against the Judgment Debtors, by the Decree Holder, suppressing all the material facts, as stated herein before in the preceding paragraphs. The Judgment dated 29/06/2012, was passed in the Old Consumer Law i.e. The Consumer Protection Act, 1986, in C. C. Case No. 131 of 2011, by the Hon’ble Commission, and the same was challenged by the Opposite Parties / Judgment Debtors in the First Appeal being FA/448/2012, before the Hon’ble State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, West Bengal, wherein the said Judgment dated 29/06/2012, has been modified and consequently duly performed by the Judgment Debtors, herein.

 

11.                That the present application under Section 72 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 is wholly misconceived, not maintainable in law, and amounts to an abuse of the process of this Hon’ble Commission, inasmuch as the original order sought to be enforced was passed under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, and the same stood modified by the Hon’ble State Commission in First Appeal No. 448 of 2012. It is settled law that penal provisions cannot be invoked mechanically or retrospectively, particularly when substantial compliance of the modified decree has already been effected.

 

12.                That Section 72 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, being a penal provision, can be invoked only upon a clear, willful, and deliberate disobedience of a subsisting and executable order. In the present case, there is neither any willful default nor deliberate non-compliance on the part of the Judgment Debtors. On the contrary, the Judgment Debtors have acted bona fide and have complied with the modified directions to the fullest extent possible.

 

13.                That the alleged non-compliance relates solely to the issuance of the Completion Certificate by the Kolkata Municipal Corporation, which is a statutory authority and not under the direct control of the Judgment Debtors. The delay or non-issuance of such certificate cannot be attributed to the Judgment Debtors, more so when the same subject matter is pending adjudication before competent judicial fora, including the Hon’ble High Court at Calcutta.

 

14.                That the Hon’ble State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, West Bengal, in Appeal No. A/594/2019, has categorically recorded a finding that non-issuance of Completion Certificate and mutation was not attributable to the Judgment Debtors, and further restrained the District Forum from passing any harsh or coercive order till disposal of C.O. No. 4034 of 2015 pending before the Hon’ble High Court at Calcutta. The said finding has attained finality and remains binding on the parties.

 

15.                That despite being fully aware of the subsisting restraint order and pendency of the civil revision and writ proceedings before the Hon’ble High Court at Calcutta, the Decree Holder has deliberately suppressed these material facts and has initiated the present proceeding under Section 72 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, with an oblique motive to harass, pressurize, and unlawfully coerce the Judgment Debtors.

 

16.                That the initiation of a penal proceeding during the subsistence of a judicial restraint order and pendency of related proceedings before the Hon’ble High Court is ex facie illegal, arbitrary, and unsustainable in law. Such conduct on the part of the Decree Holder disentitles her from any discretionary relief and renders the present application liable to be dismissed in limine.

 

17.                That no cause of action has arisen for invoking Section 72 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, and issuance of notice under Section 223(1) of the BNSS, 2023, in the facts and circumstances of the present case. The Judgment Debtors respectfully submit that continuation of the present proceeding would result in grave miscarriage of justice.

 

18.                That the Judgment Debtors crave leave of this Hon’ble Commission to rely upon all relevant documents, orders, pleadings, and records of the proceedings pending before the Hon’ble High Court at Calcutta, as and when required.

 

In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the Opposite Parties / Judgment Debtors most respectfully pray that this Hon’ble Commission may be pleased to;

 

a)    Dismiss the application filed under Section 72 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, as not maintainable and devoid of merit;

 

b)   Drop the penal proceedings initiated pursuant to notice under Section 223(1) of the BNSS, 2023;

 

c)    Pass an order in terms of the restraint granted by the Hon’ble State Commission in Appeal No. A/594/2019, until disposal of C.O. No. 4034 of 2015 by the Hon’ble High Court at Calcutta;

 

d)   Pass any other or further order(s) as this Hon’ble Commission may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice.

 

And for this act of kindness, the Judgment Debtors, as in duty bound, shall ever pray.

 

 

VERIFICATION

 

We, Santanu Kanjilal & Sanjib Das, being the Opposite Parties / Judgment Debtors, do hereby verify that the statements made in paragraphs 1 to 18 above are true to our knowledge and belief and nothing material has been concealed therefrom.

 

Verified at Baruipur, South 24 Parganas,

On this 22nd day of December, 2025.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Deponents

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

AFFIDAVIT

 

We, Santanu Kanjilal, Son of Sri Gouranga Kanjilal, aged about 56 years by faith Hindu, by Occipation Business, residing at Premises being no. 149/F, Picnic Garden Road, Police Station – Tiljala, Kolkata – 700039, and Sanjib Das, Son of Late Sankar Chandra Das, aged about 51 years, by faith Hindu, by Occupation Business, residing at Premises being no. E-6, Tagore Park, Police Station – Tiljala, Kolkata – 700039, do hereby solemnly affirm and says as follows;

 

1.   That we are the Judgment Debtors in the present Execution proceeding and are the partners of the Judgment Debtor No. 1, herein M/s. Om Tara Maa Construction, a Partnership Fir, having its Office at Premises being No. Block – E-6, Tagore Park Maine Road, Police Station – Tiljala, Police Station – Tiljala, Kolkata – 70003. We are competent to affirm this affidavit.

 

2.   That the Judgment Debtors have received a notice issued under Section 223(1) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in connection with the present execution proceeding, stating that an application under Section 72 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 has been filed alleging non-compliance of the final order dated 29.06.2012 passed in Consumer Complaint No. CC/131/2011.

 

3.   That the Judgment Debtors were shocked and surprised upon receipt of the said notice, as the Decree Holder had earlier initiated an execution proceeding being EA/183/2013, arising out of the same complaint case, under Sections 25 and 27 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, wherein substantial compliance of the modified order has already been made by the Judgment Debtors.

 

4.   That except for issuance of the Completion Certificate by the Kolkata Municipal Corporation, all other directions contained in the modified order have been duly complied with by the Judgment Debtors. The issuance of the Completion Certificate is entirely within the domain of the statutory authority and is beyond the direct control of the Judgment Debtors, despite their bona fide efforts and readiness.

 

5.   That the Hon’ble State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, West Bengal, by judgment and order dated 12.02.2020, passed in First Appeal No. A/594/2019, was pleased to allow the appeal and categorically hold that issuance of warrant of arrest against the Judgment Debtors was illegal and procedurally improper.

 

6.   That the Hon’ble State Commission further held that the execution could not proceed on the basis of the unmodified order, as the original order dated 29.06.2012 stood modified in First Appeal No. 448 of 2012, and substantial compliance of the modified order had already been effected by the Judgment Debtors.

 

7.   That the Hon’ble State Commission also recorded a clear finding that non-issuance of the Completion Certificate and mutation was not attributable to the Judgment Debtors, as related proceedings were pending before the Municipal Building Tribunal and the Hon’ble High Court at Calcutta.

 

8.   That the operative portion of the said order dated 12.02.2020 expressly restrained the District Forum from passing any harsh or coercive order against the Judgment Debtors till disposal of C.O. No. 4034 of 2015, pending before the Hon’ble High Court at Calcutta.

 

9.   That the said order of the Hon’ble State Commission was duly placed before the Ld. District Commission in EA/183/2013, and the Ld. Commission, by order dated 19.02.2020, recorded the said restraint and fixed dates awaiting disposal of the civil revision pending before the Hon’ble High Court.

 

10.                That subsequently, the Decree Holder instituted a writ petition being WPA No. 3971 of 2025 before the Hon’ble High Court at Calcutta. The said writ petition was heard on 25.03.2025 and thereafter on 19.05.2025, when the Hon’ble Court observed that C.O. No. 4034 of 2015 is still pending, and accordingly de-listed the writ petition with liberty to mention after disposal of the civil revision.

 

11.                That as on date, both C.O. No. 4034 of 2015 and WPA No. 3971 of 2025 are pending before the Hon’ble High Court at Calcutta, a fact well within the knowledge of the Decree Holder, who is a party to both proceedings.

 

12.                That the present application under Section 72 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 has been filed by the Decree Holder by suppressing material facts, including the subsisting restraint order passed by the Hon’ble State Commission and the pendency of proceedings before the Hon’ble High Court.

 

13.                That Section 72 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 being a penal provision, can be invoked only in cases of willful and deliberate disobedience of a subsisting executable order. In the present case, there is no willful default, and on the contrary, the Judgment Debtors have acted bona fide and complied with the modified decree to the fullest extent possible.

 

14.                That initiation of penal proceedings during the subsistence of a judicial restraint order and pendency of related proceedings before the Hon’ble High Court is illegal, arbitrary, and an abuse of the process of law.

 

15.                That no cause of action has arisen for invoking Section 72 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, and continuation of the present proceeding would result in grave miscarriage of justice.

 

That the statements made herein are true to my knowledge and belief and nothing material has been concealed therefrom.

 

 

 

 

DEPONENTS

Identified by me,

 

 

Advocate

Prepared in my Chamber;

 

 

Advocate

Date : 22nd day of December’ 2025

Place : Baruipur, South 24 Parganas

 

 

 

 

 

N O T A R Y

No comments:

Post a Comment