RESERVED

                STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

                               UTTAR PRADESH, LUCKNOW                               

                                  APPEAL NO. 203/2019

                      (Against the order dated 07-12-2018 in Execution Case No.

                          111/2011 of the District Consumer Forum, Ghaziabad )

Standard Chartered Bank

Through its Authorized Officer

Mr. Prashant Kumar

10, Parliament Street

New Delhi-110001

Also At:

4, Shahnawaz Ganj, Hazratganj

Lucknow-226001 U.P. 

                                                                                      ...Revisionist

                                                     Vs.

Om Pal, S/o Sri Brahm Singh

House No. 154, R.D.C.

Raj Nagar, Ghaziabad

                                                                                      ...Opposite party

BEFORE:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AKHTER HUSAIN KHAN, PRESIDENT

For the Revisionist         :   Mr. V S Bisaria, Advocate.

For the Opposite Party   :   Mr. Om Pal in person

Dated :  01-05-2019

                                                  ORDER

      MR. JUSTICE A. H. KHAN, PRESIDENT 

          Present appeal has been filed under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 against order dated 07-12-2018 passed by District Consumer Forum, Ghaziabad in Execution Case No. 111/2011 arising out of judgment and order dated 03-01-2011 passed by District Consumer Forum, Ghaziabad in Compaint Case No. 189 of 2003 Om Pal V/s Standard Chartered Bank.

Appellant has moved application for converting appeal into revision. Therefore appeal is treated as revision petition.

Vide impurned order passed in said execution case the District Consumer Forum, Ghaziabad has ordered opposite party now revisionist to handover registration certificate and insurance certificate to complainant now opposite party in revision within thirty days for securing compliance of order dated 03-01-2011 passed in above complaint. The District Consumer Forum has further vide impugned order directed to proceed under Section 27 of the Consumer Protection

:2:

Act against opposite party now revisionist in case registration certificate and insurance certificate are not handed over by it to complainant now opposite party within stipulated period.        

Learned Counsel Sri V S Bisaria appeared for revisionist.

Opposite party appeared in person.

I have heard learned Counsel for the revisionist.

It is contended by learned Counsel for the revisionist that the revisionist has already paid decretal amount of Rs.3,00,000/- to complainant now opposite party in revision but the revisionist could not comply other directions contained in said order dated 03-01-2011. Consequently the District Consumer Forum passed order under Section 27 of the Consumer Protection Act on 19-07-2012 which was set aside by State Commission vide order dated 24-07-2015 passed in Appeal No. 2168/2012. Thereafter District Consumer Forum modified its order dated 03-01-2011 vide order dated 28-10-2015 and directed revisionist bank to handover only duplicate copy of registration certificate. But the duplicate copy of registration certificate was not issued by R.T.O. concerned. The revisionist informed the District Consumer Forum and prayed to close proceedings of execution case. However, the District Consumer Forum did not close execution proceedings rather passed order dated 13-06-2013 directing revisionist to handover original registration certificate and insurance certificate and thereafter initiated proceedidngs under Section 27 of the Consumer Protection Act for non compliance.  Feeling aggrieved by order of District Consumer Forum the revisionist bank filed Appeal No. 1738 of 2017 before State Commission which was decided by State Commission vide order dated 14-03-2018 and District Consumer Forum was directed to give opportunity to revisionist to file objection. Thereafter revisionist filed objection before District Consumer Forum which has been rejected by District Consumer Forum vide impugned order.

It is contended by learned Counsel for the revisionist that the impugned order is against law. The District Consumer Forum has already modified order dated 03-01-2011 vide order dated 28-10-2015 passed in this execution case. Therefore, direction to handover original registration certificate and insurance certificate is against law.

It is further contended by learned Counsel for the revisionist that in Delhi more than 10 years old diesel vehicles are prohibited to run on road. Therefore, execution of order dated 03-01-2011 passed in complaint shall not

:3:

serve any fruitful purpose.

I have considered the submissions made by learned Counsel for the revisionist.

Order dated 03-01-2011 passed by District Consumer Forum in complaint is extracted below.

‘’ विपक्षी नं0 1 स्‍टैण्‍डर्ड चार्टेड बैंक को आदेशित किया जाता है कि वह प्रश्‍नगत टाटा क्‍वालिस गाड़ी का रजिस्‍ट्रेशन और बीमा कराके सभी मूल कागजात को परिवादी को एक माह के अन्‍दर सौंप दे। परिवादी पर यदि कोई किस्‍त बाकी हो तो वह बिना ब्‍याज के अथवा विधि के अनुसार वसूली की कार्यवाही की जा सकती है। विपक्षी नं0 1 को यह भी आदेशित किया जाता है कि वह परिवादी को मानसिक कष्‍ट व वाद व्‍यय एवं वाहन नौ साल से उपयोग से वंचित करने के मद में कुल मिलाकर 300000/- रूपये (तीन लाख रूपये) बतौर मानसिक कष्‍ट और क्षतिपूर्ति के लिए अदा करें। ‘’

The executing court is bound by the order under execution. It cannot go behind the order under execution. It cannot modify the order under execution. Impugned order passed by District Consumer Forum in execution case is in accordance with order dated 03-01-2011 passed in complaint. I find no jurisdicitional or legal error in impugned order passed by District Consumer Forum. Revision petition has no merit.

Revision petition is dismissed.    

Let copy of this order be made available to the parties positively within 15 days as per rules.

                                                                ( JUSTICE A H KHAN )

                                                                                 PRESIDENT

            Pnt.