Per Mr P N Kashalkar, Presiding Judicial Member

          Adv.Mr Yogesh Mandpe files Vakalatnama for appellant.   Adv. Mr Bhalerao present for respondent Nos.1 & 2 and Adv. Ms Mamata Ramteke present for respondent No.3.

1.      This appeal is filed by original complainant whose complaint was allowed by District Consumer Forum, Nagpur and respondent has been directed by its judgment dtd.26.02.2007 passed in CC 285/2006 to execute the sale-deed of the plot in question in favour of the complainant after receiving the balance amount. But in Clause 3 of the operative order of the judgment it is further mentioned by the Forum below that o.p. Nos. 1 & 2 shall accept the amount of `32,000/- plus interest  @ 6% p.a. and execute the sale-deed of the plot in favour of the complainant.  Taking strong exception to the Clause 3 of the operative part of the judgment, complainant has filed this appeal.

2.      We heard the submissions of Adv. Mr Yogesh Mandpe for appellant, Adv. Mr Bhalerao for respondent Nos.1 & 2 and Adv. Ms. Mamata Ramteke for respondent No.3.

3.      We are finding that the Forum below should not have incorporated Clause 3 of the operative order for the simple reason that in clause 2 it has been specifically mentioned that o.p.Nos.1, 2, 3 to execute the sale-deed in favour of the complainant in respect of the plot sold to him by accepting balance amount and registration expenses shall be borne by the complainant. However it is mentioned in Clause 3 of the operative order that o.p. Nos.1 & 2 should accept the amount of `32,000/- alongwith 6% interest from the complainant before executing the sale-deed in terms of order passed by Civil Court in Civil Suit No.131/96. 

3.      In view of this, there was no necessity for the Forum below to incorporate this clause in its operative clause No.3 in as much as the Forum should not have ensured the execution of decree passed by the Civil Court.  So incorporating Clause 3 in the operative judgment delivered on 26.08.2007 in CC No.285/2006 is appearing to be redundant, bad in law and this clause cannot be allowed to sustain in law.  Hence, we pass the following order:-

ORDER

1.      Appeal is partly allowed.

2.      Clause 3 of operative part of the judgment delivered by District Consumer Forum, Nagpur in CC No.285/2006 is totally deleted, keeping intact rest of the order.

3.      Parties are left to bear their own cost.

4.      Copy of this order be supplied to the parties free of cost.

          Pronounced on 03.05.2011.

sj