Order No. 06    /  03.01.2019

            Ld. Advocates for the Dhr as well as the Jdr-1 are present.

            The case is taken up for hearing regarding maintainability of the instant execution case.

            Heard the Ld. Advocate for the Jdr-1 who submits that the Dhr obtained an favorable order in his favour in connection with C.C No. 304 of 2013 and the Jdr-1 preferred an appeal being First Appeal No. FA/788 of 2014 before the Hon’ble State Commission and the Hon’ble State Commission has been pleased to allow  the appeal and the judgment and order dated 26.06.2014 passed in CC No. 304 of 2013 were set aside. According to the Ld. Advocate for the Jdr - 1, the instant execution case is not at all maintainable in view of the solemn order of the Hon’ble State Commission passed in FA No. 788 of 2014.

            Per contra, the Ld. Advocate for the Dhr. submits that the complainant has also filed an appeal being First Appeal No. FA/906 of 2014 before the Hon’ble State Commission against the Judgment passed in CC No. 304 of 2013 and the Hon’ble State Commission has been pleased to observe that they have already set aside the judgment and order passed by this Forum in connection with CC No. 304 of 2013. The Hon’ble State Commission further observed that the findings of FA No.788 of 2014 preferred by the Jdr-1 will govern the fate of this appeal and with the above observation the appeal of the Dhr stands disposed of.

            Admittedly, the appeal being FA No.788/2014 was allowed by setting aside the judgment and order dated 26.06.2014 passed in connection complaint case No. 304 of 2013 by the Hon’ble State Commission and simultaneously the First Appeal being No. 906 of 2014 preferred by the Dhr disposed of with the findings that FA No.788 of 2014 will govern the fate of the appeal preferred by the Dhr. Therefore, it is crystal clear that the case of the complainant demolished in view of the observation of the Hon’ble State Commission passed in First Appeal No. 788 of 2014. As such, the instant execution case is not maintainable in its present form and in law. Thus the execution case is liable to be dismissed.

            Hence,

ORDERED

That the execution case be and the same is dismissed on the ground of non- maintainability.