ORAL ORDER :- (Per Shri S.R.Khanzode, Hon’ble Presiding Judicial Member)
(1) These two appeals involve identical facts and common question of law and, therefore, are disposed of by this common order.
(2) In these appeals have been filed against the order dated 19/04/2011 passed in execution application U/s. 27 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 which arose for non-compliance of the order dated 30/04/2007 passed in Consumer Complaint No.78/2007, Sou.Swati Shriniwas Vathare Vs. M/s. Chanakya Constructions & ors. and Consumer Complaint No.97/2007, Shriniwas Purushottam Vathare V/s. M/s.Chanakya Constructions & ors., passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Satara and as further affected by an order passed in Appeals bearing No.922/2010 and No.923/2010, passed on 04/03/2011 by this Commission.
(3) The original opponent it builder and developer. By the order dated 30/04/2007, the forum directed him to refund the consideration. Further, concession to sell the property was also given. The builder unsuccessfully challenged the same in the appeal.
(4) We need not to refer to the execution proceedings filed by the complainants to get executed the orders passed in the consumer complaints, supra, since they are not relevant.
(5) However, the builder sought no objection from the bank to which the complainants had mortgage the flats for the house loan taken by them. The bank refused the permission, by notice dated 25/03/2011, the builder asked the complainants to obtain no objection from the bank to sell the property. Since the complainant failed to obtain the same, the builder filed the execution application No.24/2011 against the complainants on 06/04/2011. By the impugned order dated 19/04/2011, the forum dismissed the same/rejected the same. Feeling aggrieved thereby, this appeal is preferred by the builder – M/s.Chanakya Constructions.
(6) Considering the nature of the order passed in Consumer Complaint No.212/2006 (dated 30/04/2007), supra, there is nothing which fasten any obligation on the complainants to obtain no objection from the bank to sell the mortgage property by the builder. Under the circumstances, since the complainants, prima facie, cannot be held responsible for/and or accused of failure or omit to comply any order made by the forum. Therefore, dismissal/rejection of the execution application by the impugned order dated 19/04/2011, cannot be faulted with. Holding accordingly, we pass the following order.
ORDER
(1) Appeal Nos.479/11 and 480/11 are not admitted and disposed off accordingly.
(2) No order as to costs.
Pronounced on 5th July, 2011.
