Per Shri P.N. Kashalkar – Hon’ble Presiding Judicial Member:

(1)          This appeal is filed by original Complainant in recovery application No.7/2010 which has been dismissed by the Forum below on 07.05.2010.

(2)          Facts to the extent material may be stated as under:

The Complainant had filed Consumer Complaint No.69/2001 in the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Nashik.  It was allowed by the Forum below by its judgement and award dated 04.10.2002.  While allowing the complaint partly, the Forum below directed Opposite Party to give possession of Flat No.2 as per agreement with completion certificate and occupation certificate and also directed to pay Rs.10,000/- as compensation for delayed delivery of possession and directed Opposite Party to adjust amount of Rs.10,000/- towards amount of Rs.16,000/- to be recovered from the Complainant at the time of giving of the possession. The Forum below also awarded cost of Rs.500/-.  Aggrieved by this order Opposite Party had filed appeal, but, it was dismissed. So, this order obtained finality. 

(3)          Then Complainant had filed execution application no.78/2006.  Execution application came to be disposed of by the Ld. District Forum, Nashik observing that as per original award the Opposite Party was directed to give possession of the flat to the Complainant immediately and the said execution application was thus disposed of.  Thereafter, the Complainant again moved Application No.7/2010 and prayed that the judgement Debtor should be directed to give possession of the flat and he also claimed certain amount for delayed possession.  On 20.04.2010 possession was ultimately given to the Complainant by the judgement debtor.  Thereafter the Complainant/Decree holder filed Execution Application N.7/2010 and prayed that though possession has been given to him by judgement debtor, judgement debtor should be directed to execute sale deed of Row Huse no.2 in his favour and should also be directed to pay him Rs.900/- per month as compensation.  However, this application for execution was disposed of by the Ld.Forum by observing that the possession of the row house has been given to the Complainant on 20.04.2010 and judgement debtor has fully complied with the order passed by the District Forum.  It attained finality and there is nothing which could be further granted to the Complainant, so the execution application filed in 2010 by the Decree holder was disposed of.  In this application the decree holder specifically requested that Opposite Party should be directed to execute sale deed of row house in his favour, but, this prayer was not considered by the Forum below for the simple reason that in the original award no such relief was granted by the Forum below.  Aggrieved by this dismissal of Execution Application No.7/2010 original Complainant has filed this appeal. 

(4)          We heard Appellant in person and Mr.Tushar Sonawane, Advocate for the Respondent/Original Judgement debtor.

(5)          It was pointed out by the Appellant in the course of argument that the Respondent had not paid Rs.500/- towards cost which was awarded by the District Forum while allowing his complaint way back on 04.10.2002. We therefore directed Respondent today to pay the said amount to the original Complainant.  Accordingly, the Complainant has paid in our presence today Rs.500/- to the Appellant. 

(6)          Then we heard this appeal on merit.  We are finding that there is absolutely no merit in the appeal preferred by original Complainant.  As per award the Opposite Party has complied with the order and has put Complainant in possession of the flat in question.  As per the award certain amount of damages was granted and same was adjusted by the Respondent from the amount recoverable from the Appellant.  This being so there is nothing on record to show that still there is something left out in the execution.  Execution Application was rightly dismissed by the Forum below after observing that the award was fully complied with as per operative order passed in the original award.  We are finding that this appeal is devoid of any merit and same is liable to be dismissed.  Hence, we pass the following order:

O R  D  E  R

         (i)          Appeal stands dismissed.

       (ii)          No order as to costs.