Per Shri P. N.Kashalkar, Hon’ble Presiding Judicial Memer: This appeal filed by org.decree holder against the order passed by District Consumer Redressal Forum, Central Mumbai in execution application no. 52/2009 decided on 28/05/2010. Facts to the extent material may be stated as under: The complainant had filed a complaint bearing no.59/2005 and award was passed on 16/05/2006 by the District Consumer Redressal Forum, Mumbai Central (Forum below in short). Against the award, appeal was preferred by the complainant vide A.no.1158/2007 on 01/11/2007. The appeal was disposed of and since the order of State Commission was not complied with, decree holders filed execution proceedings under Section 27 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986. Opp.party remained absent in the execution proceeding and warrant was issued in the meantime. Forum below had passed order on 03/04/2010 and directed that remaining amount of Rs.9,577/- be paid by the opp.party/judgement debtor to the complainants. On 03/04/2010 the applicant had taken copy of the said order for service to the opp.party. But service was not accepted; therefore, the complainants/decree holders made an application of contempt under Section 27 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and requested that stern action should be taken against the judgement debtor. Judgement debtor filed written say and pleaded that complainant’s allegations are improper, unjust and in the meantime the opp.party had paid and deposited the remaining decreetal amount in the District Consumer Redressal Forum. The total amount of Rs.33,946/- was recoverable from the opp.party/judgement debtors. Opp.party/judgement debtors from time to time deposited various amounts by 30/04/2010 and Forum below was satisfied that total decreetal amount was complied with and deposited in the Forum below and therefore, Forum below directed whole amount should be paid to the decree holders and since the decree was satisfied the Darkhast was disposed of. Aggrieved by this order the original decree holders have filed this appeal. We heard submissions of Adv.Mr.E.Keshwani for the appellants without issuing notice of admission to the opponent/responent for admission, since on the face of it the appeal appears to be meritless. We are finding that the appellants have filed this appeal just because of the fact that while disposing of the Darkhast proceedings, the Forum below had not passed scathing strictures against the respondent which Forum below had done in previous execution proceeding. Upon hearing Adv.Mr.Keshvani, we are finding that Forum below dismissed the execution proceeding since it was fully satisfied. Once the amount payable under the decree has been paid or deposited in the District Consumer Redressal Forum in compliance of the order passed by it in execution proceeding, there is no question of passing strictures against the judgement debtor. Adv.Keshvani's contention that strictures should have been passed against the opp.party/judgement debtor is appearing to be uncalled for and we find no merit in the appeal filed only for that purpose. Under these circumstances, we are finding that there is no merit in the appeal. Order passed by the District Consumer Redressal Forum is just and proper and sustainable in law. Hence, we pass following order:- :-ORDER-: 1. Appeal stands rejected at the stage of admission itself. 2. In the given circumstance, there is no order as to costs. 3. Copies of the order herein be furnished to both the parties. | 
