Tamil Nadu

North Chennai

EA/44/2003

A.Sridar - Complainant(s)

Versus

K.N.Loganathan,proprieter - Opp.Party(s)

party in person

21 Oct 2016

ORDER

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSALFORUM, CHENNAI (NORTH) 2ND FLOOR, FRAZER BRIDGE ROAD, V.O.C.NAGAR PARK TOWN, CHENNAI -          

PRESENT:THIRU.K.JAYABALAN B.SC.,B.L.,   :   PRESIDENT

TMT. T.KALAIYARASI,B.A.B.L.,                   : MEMBER II   

FRIDAY THE 21^st   DAY OF OCTOBER 2016

E.A.NO. 44/2003

IN

 

C.C.NO: 310/2002

 

 

 

A.Sridar,

RNR Flats, F-2,

4, East Mada Street,

Viilivakkam,

Chennai – 49.                                          

                                                                       …. Petitioner/Complainant   

 

/ verus/

 

 

Mr.K.N.Loganathan, Proprietor, R.N.R.Builders, 30, Baliamman Koil Street, Villivakkam, Chennai – 49.

 

 

                                                                ... Respondent/Opposite Party

                                         

 

Date of petition                                             : 13.09.2012

Decree-holder/Complainant                        : Party in Person

 

 

 

DOCKET  O R D E R

 

BY PRESIDENT, THIRU.K.JAYABALAN, B.Sc.,B.L.,

          The petitioner/Complainant filed a Complaint against the respondent/Opposite Party praying to direct the Opposite Party to provide parking space for cars and two wheelers and water with compensation of Rs.78,700/- with cost.

         2. The said Complaint was ordered on 12.03.2003 as follows:

      The opposite party is directed to provide parking space for cars and two wheelers and provide water with compensation of Rs.78,700/- (Rupees Seventy Eight  Thousand  Seven   Hundred only) with cost of Rs.1000/- (Rupees One Thousand only). Time for payment one month, failing which the complainant is at liberty to take proceedings for arrest of the opposite party under section 27 of CP Act.

 

      3. After passing such order the petitioner filed this Execution Application in the year 2003 itself and thereafter it was pending for 13 years till date. During pendency of this application, a sum of Rs.75,000/- was paid by the respondent  to the petitioner by way of various amounts on various  dates. The respondent categorically stated that he is unable to provide car park to the Complainant. Hence a show cause notice was issued to the respondent on 17.10.2016 requiring him to reply that why he should not be punished under section 27 of the CP Act for non-compliance of the order passed in the Complaint dated 12.03.2002. Though the respondent was given sufficient time till 17.10.2016 to reply for the above said show cause notice, but he has not chosen to submit any reply.

4. On 17.10.2016 the respondent was appeared and questioned that “why he should not be punished under section 27 of the CP Act”, as he had not complied the order of this Forum dated 12.03.2002. On questioning the respondent replied for the show cause notice as follows:

     நிலச் சொந்தக்காரரிடம் இருந்து கட்டிடம் கட்ட பொது அதிகாரம் வாங்கி கட்டி முடித்தேன், கார் பார்க்கிங் ஒதுக்க மனுதாரிடம் இருந்து எந்த பணமும் வாங்கவில்லை, கார் பார்க்கிங் இடம் ஒதுக்கி தர Construction Agreement-ல் clause இல்லை, என்னுடைய ஒப்பந்தப்படி மனுதாரர் எனக்கு  ரூ,1 லட்சம் பாக்கி தரவேண்டும், அதிகாரம் கொடுத்தவர் இறந்து விட்டார், அவருடைய வாரிசுகள் வெளிநாட்டில் உள்ளனர், அவர்கள் இருப்பிடம் எனக்கு தெரியவில்லை, ஆகையினால் மனுதாரருக்கு  கார் பார்க்கிங் ஒதுக்கி தர இயலாது, அதனால் எனக்கு எந்த தண்டனையும் வழங்காது, இந்த மனுவிலிருந்து விடுவிக்க கோருகிறேன், பாக்கி பணம் ரூ,4,700./ கொடுக்க தயாராக இருக்கிறேன்,

 

The respondent categorically replied that he is not in a position to comply the order of this Forum dated 12.03.2002 to provide such provision there is no clause in the agreement and further he is only a power of attorney holder and the person who gave the power of attorney also died and he do not know the  whereabouts of his legal heirs and therefore in such circumstances he may be relieved from this petition without punishing him and  further he is ready to pay the balance amount Rs.4,700/- to the petitioner.

          5. Even for argument sake, it is taken as that the person whom the power of attorney  given to the respondent herein was died, immediate duty cast upon to the respondent to take necessary steps  to cancel the said power of attorney  in order to relieve from the binding of the power of attorney, but the respondent herein has failed to do so.  Hence the plea taken by the respondent herein is devoid of merits.

          6.  Furthermore, the respondent filed appeal in AP No.522/2003 before the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (SCDRC), Chennai challenging the order of this Forum dt.12.03.2002. The said appeal was rejected by the    SCDRC dated 02.09.2004. Therefore the order passed by this Forum become final and the said order ought to have complied by the respondent in accordance with the directions made in the order. One of the relief given to the petitioner in the order to provide parking space for cars and two wheelers and also water. Therefore, the respondent is bound to comply the order of this Forum.  

          7. Since the respondent failed to comply the order dated 12.03.2002, for the past 12 years which is highly deplorable and hence the respondent is liable to be punished under section 27 of the CP Act severely  for the default committed by him.

          In the result the respondent /Opposite Party failed to comply the order of this Forum dated 12.03.2002, the respondent is sentenced with simple imprisonment for a term of 3 months.

Dictated to the Steno-Typist transcribed and typed by her corrected and pronounced by us on this 21^th day of October 2016.                                                                    

MEMBER - II                                                                        PRESIDENT