Heard Adv.Shukla for the Appellant. None for the Respondent.

Respondent is not necessary because at the stage of admission itself we are

disposing of this appeal. This appeal has been filed U/s 27 (A) of the Consumer

Protection Act,1986. In our view, appeal U/s 27 (A) of the Consumer Protection

Act,1986 can be filed only against the order of sentence passed by the District

Forum after full trial held U/s 27 of the Consumer Protection Act,1986. So, we

examined the impugned order annexed at Annexure “D”. Impugned order is

nothing but framing of particulars to be done under summary procedure which is

required to be followed U/s 27(3) of the Consumer Protection Act,1986. Under

summary procedure, once the accused comes before the court, particulars are

required to be explained. The same has been done by the District Forum when

the appellant appeared before them in the pending trial. Now, framing of

particulars of offence is done owing the non compliance of the award passed by

the District Forum in CC No.198/09. It is not the case of the appellant that

something more or something extra has been mentioned in the particulars of

offence. Particulars of offence have been properly explained strictly in terms of

award passed by the District Forum and, therefore, considered from any angle,

the appeal at this stage is liable to be dismissed. We are finding no substance in

the appeal.

Hence the order…

Draft

ORDER

1) Appeal is dismissed.

2) No order as to cost.

3) Inform the parties accordingly.

Delivered on 14/07/2011.