Madhya Pradesh

StateCommission

RP/16/176

CHIEF MEDICAL OFFICER - Complainant(s)

Versus

KAUSHAR ALI - Opp.Party(s)

SH.AJAY DUBEY

14 Nov 2019

ORDER

M. P. STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BHOPAL

PLOT NO.76, ARERA HILLS, BHOPAL

                              

                                    REVISION PETITION NO. 176 OF 2016

(Arising out of order dated 21.11.2016 passed in Execution Case.No.08/2014 by District Forum, Sagar)

 

CHIEF MEDICAL & HEALTH OFFICER, DISTRICT

HOSPITAL, SAGAR.                                                                                              …          PETITIONER

 

Versus

                 

KAUSHAR ALI.                                                                                                        …         RESPONDENT.

 

BEFORE:

 

                  HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE SHANTANU S. KEMKAR     :      PRESIDENT

                  HON’BLE DR. (MRS) MONIKA MALIK                          :      MEMBER

                  HON’BLE SHRI S. S. BANSAL                                      :      MEMBER                                   

 

                                      O R D E R

14.11.2019

 

           Shri Ajay Dubey, learned counsel for the petitioner.

            Shri Manish Nema, learned counsel for the respondent.

 

As per Shri Justice Shantanu S. Kemkar :                       

            This revision by the opposite party/petitioner is directed against the order dated 21.11.2016 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Sagar (For short ‘Forum’) in Execution Case No. 08/2014.

2.                     Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Forum has ignored the calculations submitted by it in which it was stated that the respondent/complainant had already been paid what was payable to him as per office record and as per entitlement.

3.                     On the other hand learned counsel for the respondent/complainant submits that the amount what was payable to him was not paid and as such the Forum has rightly passed the impugned order.

4.                     We have gone through the impugned order.  On bare perusal of it, it is clear that the Forum has merely stated that the calculations submitted by the respondent/complainant are proper and as such accepted whereas the calculations submitted by the petitioner/opposite party are disallowed.  In our considered view this cannot be said to be a judicial order as no reasons are being assigned in it as to how calculations submitted by the complainant are accepted and calculations submitted by the petitioner/opposite party are disallowed.

5.                     In the circumstances, we set-aside the impugned order and remand the case to the Forum for deciding the execution application afresh in accordance with law.

 

-2-

6.                     The Forum shall take into consideration the calculations submitted by the parties and as may be further submitted and pass a speaking order.

7.                     Parties are permitted to file their respective calculations within three weeks in addition to what they have already submitted, if they choose to file.

8.                     Parties to appear before the Forum on 12.12.2019.

9.                     With the aforesaid directions, the revision petition is disposed of.

 

     (Justice Shantanu S. Kemkar)    (Dr. Monika Malik)     (S. S. Bansal)           

                  President                               Member                   Member