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

(1)          This revision petition filed by original judgement debtors who are aggrieved by the fact that the Forum below has issued recovery certificates in three complaints to the Collector for recovery of Rs.86,000/- for each Complainant the judgement debtors have filed this revision petition. 

(2)          Facts lie in narrow compass. The three Complainants together had filed three complaints, being Complaint Nos.377/2004, 378/2004 and 414/2004.  The Forum below allowed the complaints and directed that Opposite Party should procure building completion certificate, occupation certificate and should supply water connection within one month from the date of receipt of the order passed by the Forum below.  Else otherwise for delay penalty of Rs.1,000/- per month was imposed on the Opposite Party.  The Opposite Party preferred appeals in this connection.  Said appeals were disposed of by this Commission on 15.10.2008 being Appeal Nos.690 to 692 of 2008.  The order was confirmed.  The Opposite Party then approached  Hon’ble National Commission by filing Revision Petition.  Revision Petition was also dismissed and it was specifically directed to the Revision Petitioners that they should get completion certificate and occupation certificate and Respondent assured that they would comply with the order of the State Commission provided the Respondent cooperates with them.  It thus seen that order passed by the Forum below was confirmed by the Hon’ble National Commission.

(3)          In the execution proceeding filed by the three complainants separately, the Forum below has issued recovery certificate under section 25(3) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 to the Collector of concerned District and Forum below has directed in all the three recovery certificates to recover amount of Rs.86,000/- from the judgement debtors.  Aggrieved by this order the original judgement debtors have filed this revision petition.

(4)          We heard statement of Mr.Patwardhan, Advocate for the Petitioner and Mr.Wavikar, Advocate for the Respondent.  We are finding that the order passed by the Forum below on the face of it appears to be just, proper and there  is no need to interfere with the order passed by the Forum below.  If there is default committed by the judgement debtor, the Complainant/decree holder can file recovery proceeding either under section 25(3) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 or by filing prosecution under section 27 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.  The Complainants/Respondents have chosen to proceed against under section 25(3) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 by approaching District Forum and accordingly three recovery certificates have been issued to the Collector by the District Forum. 

(5)          The grievance of Advocate Mr.Patwardhan for the Revision Petition is that the amount of Rs.86,000/- is wrongly mentioned in the recovery certificate and that should have been Rs.39,000/- only, calculated by District Forum itself by their order 01.10.2009.  However, we are finding that while issuing recovery certificate in all these proceeding filed at the instance of original decree holders, the Forum below seems to have taken into account the fact that in the original award passed by the District Forum, amount of Rs.1,000/- per month has been awarded for delay in procuring completion certificate, occupation certificate and water connection. Since, by common judgement three complaints have been disposed of, the Forum below did not mention that each of the Complainant should be paid Rs.1,000/- per month by way of damages, if it is not complied with within one month from the date of receipt of the order.  It appears that while issuing recovery certificate under section 25(3) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, the Forum below seems to have taken into consideration this amount.  We are not here to calculate the amount.  The amount will have to be calculated by District Forum in terms of award.  If at all the Revisionist has any grievance about amount to be recovered as decreetal amount in all the three complaints or in recovery proceedings he may approach District Forum by filing application to get rectified recovery certificate in all these three recovery proceedings.  But, this job cannot be undertaken by us.   It has got to be undertaken by District Forum itself.  With this observation we pass the following order:

O  R  D  E  R

     (i)       Revision Petition stands dismissed.

    (ii)       Parties are left to bear their own costs.

  (iii)       R & P be sent back immediately.