Maharashtra Consumer Commission Restores Execution Proceedings Against Absconding Surat Couple In ₹97 Lakh Loan Case

Mumbai: The State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission has set aside an order of the district consumer forum and directed restoration of an execution application against a Surat-based couple accused of defaulting on a RS 97 lakh loan, holding that warrants issued against them cannot be cancelled unless in accordance with provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

The Commission, comprising Justice S.P. Tavade and member Vijay C. Premchandani, ruled that the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, South Mumbai had acted beyond its jurisdiction in dismissing the execution proceedings merely because the accused were absconding and untraceable.

The case stems from a complaint filed by advocate Balasaheb Deshmukh on behalf of a  Malabar Hill resident Daevi Prakash Sheth against Surat residents Rameshkumar Gordhanbhai Kathiria and his wife Heenaben Kathiria. According to the complaint, the couple had approached Sheth in February 2016 seeking financial assistance of Rs 80 lakh for business purposes, agreeing to repay the amount within 15 days of demand. Heenaben stood guarantor to the transaction. Subsequently, an additional Rs 17 lakh was borrowed on similar terms.

While the couple initially serviced the interest regularly, payments stopped after July 2017 and several cheques issued by them were dishonoured. Sheth then moved the district commission, which in February 2022 held the couple guilty of deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. The forum directed them to repay Rs 97 lakh along with steep interest—1.10% per month for a specified period and 2.50% per month thereafter—besides Rs 25,000 compensation and Rs 10,000 litigation costs.

When the order was not complied with, Sheth initiated execution proceedings in 2022 under Section 72 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. Summons issued to the accused remained unserved as they had reportedly vacated their residence and left the country. A non-bailable warrant (NBW) was subsequently issued, but remained unexecuted.

In November 2025, the district commission dismissed the execution application, terming it “infructuous” on the ground that the accused were absconding and enforcement had become impractical.

Challenging this, Sheth approached the State Commission, arguing that the dismissal defeated the very purpose of penal provisions under the Consumer Protection Act.

Allowing the appeal, the State Commission observed that once criminal execution proceedings are initiated under Section 72, the forum assumes powers akin to a judicial magistrate and must carry the proceedings to their logical conclusion. It held that the district commission had no authority to terminate the execution on administrative grounds or declare it futile.

Importantly, the Commission relied on Section 70(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which provides that a warrant remains in force until it is executed or cancelled by the issuing court. It further noted that provisions such as proclamation and attachment under Sections 82 and 83 CrPC could be invoked when warrants remain unexecuted.

“The criminal complaint cannot be dismissed when the complainant is diligently pursuing the matter,” the Commission observed, adding that the lower forum had denied the complainant a fair opportunity to prosecute the offence.

Terming the district commission’s order “illegal and improper,” the State Commission restored the execution application to its original stage and directed that it be decided on merits. It also clarified that the non-bailable warrants issued against the accused shall continue to remain in force unless cancelled in accordance with law.

When FPJ contacted the complainant;’s father, Prakash Sheth, he expressed his displeasure that the orders of State commission was yet not abided by the lower court, Sheth said , “It is astonishing that despite the order dated 9.2.2026, and despite we having sent 2 emails to the district commission requesting to now restore the matters and list them, the consumer commission south Mumbai has not yet complied with the orders of the State Commission, which is quite an alarming state of affairs going on at District Consumer levels".

To get details on exclusive and budget-friendly property deals in Mumbai & surrounding regions, do visit: https://budgetproperties.in/