Order by:

Sh.Amrinder Singh Sidhu, President

1.       Brief facts of the present matter  are that  the complainants had filed consumer complaint No.1 on 01.012014 before this District Consumer Forum (now  District Consumer Commission) which was partly accepted by this District Commission, Moga vide order dated 04.03.2014 . The relevant portion of the order is reproduced as under:-

“In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the complaint filed by the complainant is partly accepted. The OPs-Kaner Investment is directed to make the outstanding payment of Rs.75,000/- to the complainants, within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order, failing which, they would be liable to pay the awarded amount alongwith interest @ 6% per annum w.e.f. 27.09.2012 i.e. date of acknowledgement until realization. Keeping in view the peculiar circumstances of the case, the parties are left to bear their own costs. Copies of this order be supplied to the parties, free of costs and thereafter the file be consigned to record room.”

2.       Heard the ld.counsel for the applicants/ decree holders and also perused the  written submissions filed by the ld.counsel for the applicants/ decree holders.

3.       The Opposite Parties/ JDs  have failed to make the compliance of the order dated 04.03.2014 and thereafter, the Complainants/ Decree Holders moved an application before this District Commission for the compliance of the order and  ultimately, due to non compliance of the order,  the property of the Opposite Parties/ JDs was attached vide Rapat No. 565 on 18.07.2015. In the meanwhile, the Opposite Parties/ JDs appeared through counsel and filed objections which were dismissed vide order dated 01.03.2017 by this District Commission.

4.       Thereafter,  the attached property of the Opposite Parties/ JDs was put  on auction for sale, but nobody came forward to give the bid to purchase the property. Then, the Complainants/ Decree Holders moved an application for permission to participate in the bid which was allowed on 01.11.2017. Accordingly,  in pursuance of this order, the sale was conducted on 17.07.2018 by the office of Tehsildar Dharamkot in favour of the Complainants/ Decree Holders. It is pertinent to mention over here that the present execution was filed by both Complainants/ Decree Holders Kulwant Singh and Kuljit Singh, but lateron, Kuljit Kaur moved an application before the office of Tehsildar that he had received the share of decretal amount and filed ‘no objection’ for participating in the sale by Kulwant Singh, one of the Complainants/ Decree Holders.

5.       After the expiry of the stipulated period as provided in CPC, the Complainants/ Decree Holders moved an application to confirm and absolute the sale under order 21 rule 92 CPC before this District Commission. Perusal of the record shows that nobody has challenged the said sale nor moved any objection by the Opposite Parties/ JDs nor by any third party.  Perusal of Order 21 rule 92 of CPC  1908 ( as applicable to Pb. Hry.Chd, Delhi & H.P) it has been specifically mentioned that where no application is made under rule 89, rule 90 or rule 91, or where such application is made and disallowed, the Court shall make an order confirming the sale, and thereupon the sale shall become absolute.  As mentioned above, since the attached property of the Opposite Parties/ JDs was put  on auction for sale, but nobody came forward to give the bid to purchase the property and then, the Complainants/ Decree Holders moved an application for permission to participate in the bid which was allowed on 01.11.2017. Perusal of the record further shows that Kuljit Kaur one of the decree holder has already moved an application before the Tehsildar Concerned on 28.09.2018 to the effect that she has already received the awarded amount of her share from Kulwant Singh, decree holder and now  she has objection, if Kulwant Singh, decree holder alone purchase the attached property of the Opposite Parties/ JDs in bid proceedings. The original writing of  the applicant is also placed on record  as mentioned in the interim order dated 28.09.2018 passed by this District Consumer Commission, Moga.   Accordingly,  in pursuance of this order, the sale was conducted on 17.07.2018 by the office of Tehsildar Dharamkot in favour of the Complainants/ Decree Holders.  Now sufficient time has already  elapsed since the date of sale i.e. 17.07.2018 by the office of Tehsildar Dharamkot in favour of the Complainants/ Decree Holders, hence this District Commission has no hesitation to pass an order accordingly for confirming and absolute the sale in favour of the Complainant/ Decree Holder.

6.       Keeping in view the aforesaid facts and documents placed on record, this District Commission, Moga confirms  and absolute the sale in favour of Complainant/ Decree Holder Sh.Kulwant Singh. The sale certificate be issued accordingly in accordance with law.  Copies of this order be supplied to the parties free of cost and thereafter, the file be consigned to record room.           

7.     Reason for delay in deciding the execution application.

This execution application could not be decided within the prescribed period because the government has not appointed any of the Whole Time Members in this Commission for about 3 years i.e. w.e.f. 15.09.2018 till 27.08.2021. Moreover, the President of this Commission is doing additional duties at District Consumer Commission, Faridkot and furthermore due to pandemic of COVID-19.

Announced in Open Commission.

Dated: 21.09.2021.