Per Shri S.R. Khanzode, Hon’ble Presiding Judicial Member

          Mr.S.M. Patil, Advocate for respondent Nos.2to5 & 7to11 files Vakalatnama, taken on record.  Appellant does not want to proceed against respondent No.12/State of Maharashtra and filed pursis to delete the name of said respondent.  Accordingly, name of State of Maharashtra is allowed to be deleted as per request of the appellant.  Necessary amendment be carried out in the appeal memo by the appellant.

          This appeal takes an exception to the order dated 26/3/2010 in Execution Application No.146/2008 Sou.Manik Rajgond Patil V/s. Panchasheel Nagri Sahakari Patsanstha Maryadit, Astha & Ors.  passed by District Consumer Forum, Sangli.  In the instant case, appellants/opponents in original execution proceeding were convicted for offence punishable under section 27 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) and sentenced to undergo a simple imprisonment of two years.  Feeling aggrieved thereby, this appeal is preferred by the convicted persons.

          Admit and heard forthwith with the consent of parties.

          Referring to the impugned order as well as the so called statement of the appellants/accused recorded on 26/03/2010 (page-74&75 of the appeal compilation), it could be seen that the Forum below without following the requisite procedure for criminal trial i.e. to hold trial by way of summary trial procedure, adopted this novel procedure and without explaining the substance of accusation for particulars of offence to the appellants/accused further holding a trial accordingly and straightway convicted the appellants/accused.  Therefore, such conviction would not stand in the eyes of law.  We are at pain, observing in spite of several decisions of the Commission and administrative instructions on the subject issued to the District Consumer Forums, neither Forum below nor concerned lawyers are observing the procedure.  In view of this, the impugned order cannot be supported.  We hold accordingly and pass the following order :-

                             -: ORDER :-

1.       Appeal is allowed.  The impugned order dated 26/03/2010 is quashed and set aside.

2.       Matter is remitted back for de novo trial to the Forum below in the light of observations made earlier.

3.       As submitted by the appellants, amount deposited as condition of bail before the Forum below be retained till the trial is over.

4.       Both parties shall appear before the Forum below on 22/11/2010.

5.       In the given circumstances, there shall be no order as to costs.

6.       Copies of the order be furnished to the parties.