First Appeal No. 614 of 2010. Case: M/s. Gariba Construction Co. Vs Malad Dipti Apartment Co-op Housing Society Ltd.. Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
| Case Number | First Appeal No. 614 of 2010 |
| Counsel | For Appellant: Mr. A.H. Ponda, Advocate |
| Judges | R.C. Chavan, Presiding Member and Dhanraj Khamatkar, Member |
| Issue | Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) - Section 389; Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) - Section 389(3); Consumer Protection Act, 1986 - Section 27 |
| Judgement Date | June 30, 2013 |
| Court | Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission |
Order:
R.C. Chavan, Presiding Member
-
Heard Mr. A.H. Ponda-Advocate for the appellant. None for respondent. This appeal is directed against the order passed by the District Forum, South Mumbai on Execution Application No. 14/2008 on 23/06/2010, whereby the Learned President and Member of forum convicted the appellant for an offence punishable under section 27 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and sentenced him to suffer two years Simple Imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs. 10,000/- and in default to deposit fine, Simple Imprisonment for further period of three months.
-
The execution application arose out of order dated 17/05/2007 passed in complaint no. 243/2006, whereby the forum had directed the appellant to execute conveyance of the entire society's property in favour of the complainant society. Appellant was also directed to take immediate steps to obtain the Occupation Certificate from the Greater Mumbai Municipal Corporation and to hand over the same to the complainant. Appellant filed an appeal bearing no. A/08/537 before this Commission, which was dismissed by this Commission by an order dated 21/06/2008. Appellant seems to have preferred revision before the National Commission bearing no. 3303/2008, which was pending when the execution application was filed before the District Forum. District Forum conducted the proceedings of execution application expeditiously on 23/06/2010 and convicted and sentenced the appellant as aforementioned. Aggrieved thereby, appellant has filed the present appeal.
-
Today, the appellant has tendered judgment of the National Commission in Revision Petition no. 3303/2008 decided on 17/09/2013, whereby National Commission has set aside the order of this Commission in First Appeal no. A/08/537 dated 21/06/2008 and has directed this Commission to rehear the appeal. National Commission has directed the parties to appear before this Commission on 28/10/2013. Thus, the order which was sought to be executed itself does not exist since this Commission would have to hear the appeal against the order passed by the District Forum in consumer complaint no. 243/2006 once again. In view of this, the appeal would have to be allowed and the conviction of the appellant and the sentence imposed upon him would have to be set aside, as there could be no question of disobedience of order, which could not have been executed since the appeal against it would be still pending before this Commission. Ld. Counsel for the...
To continue reading
Request your trial