Paragat Singh filed a consumer case on 17 Jul 2015 against State of Punjab in the Sangrur Consumer Court. The case no is EA/85/2014 and the judgment uploaded on 22 Jul 2015.
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SANGRUR.
Execution No.: 85
Instituted on: 18.09.2014
Decided on: 17.07.2015
Pargat Singh (since deceased) son of Bachan Singh , resident of Village & Post Office Khanal Kalan, Tehsil Sunam, District Sangrur through his legal representative Kaushal Inder Singh son of Late Pargat Singh, through his special power of attorney Pawan Kumar son of Hans Raj, resident of Sunam, Distt. Sangrur.
…Complainant/DH
Versus
1. State of Punjab, through Collector, Sangrur District Sangrur.
2. The Executive Engineer, I.B. Lehal Division, Patiala.
..Opposite party/JDs.
For the complainant/DH: Shri Ashish Garg, Adv.
For OP/JDs : Shri Amrit Lal Goyal.
Quorum: Sukhpal Singh Gill, President
K.C.Sharma, Member
Sarita Garg, Member
Order by : Sukhpal Singh Gill, President.
1. Shri Pargat Singh, complainant/Decree Holder (referred to as DH in short) has preferred the present execution application against the opposite parties/JD (referred to as JDs in short) on the ground that earlier complainant/DH filed a complaint before this Forum which was dismissed vide its orders dated 09.11.2005. Aggrieved with that order, the complainant/DH filed an appeal before the Hon’ble State Commission, Chandigarh and the same was allowed vide its orders dated 10.08.2011 and directed the OP/JDs to execute the sale deed of the property in favour of the complainant/DH within two months after the receipt of copy of this order. It is further averred that despite repeated visits of the complainant/DH the same was not got executed in favour of the complainant/DH. It is further averred that Shri Pargat Singh has already died on 14.09.2012 and he executed a will dated 20.4.2011, bequeathing the canal house to his son Kaushalinder Singh, present decree holder. It is further averred that the said Kaushalinder Singh executed a special power of attorney in favour of Pawan Kumar son of Hans Raj, resident of Sunam to pursue the matter. As such, the decree holder has prayed that the Op/JDs be directed to comply with the orders dated 10.08.2011 of the Hon’ble State Commission and be also punished under section 27 for non compliance of the orders.
2. After receipt of the execution application, show cause notice to the OP/JDs under section 27 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 was issued and the OP/JDs appeared and filed reply and affidavit stating that they have filed a SLP against the orders of the Hon’ble National Commission before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India. It is worth mentioning here that both the appeals filed before the Hon’ble National Commission and the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India were dismissed.
3. A bare perusal of the file reveals that Shri Rakesh Kumar Gupta, SDO, Nabha Sub Division, Balad Kothi for OP/JD number 2 appeared on 28.1.2015 and made a statement that they will comply with the orders of the Hon’ble State Commission within one month from that day i.e. by 28.2.2015. Further on 4.3.2015, Shri Amrit Lal Goyal, Executive Engineer, Lehal Division, IB Patiala made a statement that he has been authorised vide memo dated 26.2.2015 to execute the sale deed in favour of Pargat Singh, DH and will execute the sale deed in favour of Pargat Singh/DH on 12.3.2015. The same was executed on 12.3.2015 in favour of the Decree holder and the learned counsel for the DH has made a statement on 12.5.2015 that he received the sale deed number 1487 on 12.3.2015 from the OP/JD. It is worth mentioning here that though the OP/JDs filed appeals before the Hon’ble National Commission and before the Hon’ble supreme Court of India, New Delhi, but the same were dismissed by that courts. But, the OP/JDs have not even produced on record the copies of the orders of the same. In the present case, the Hon’ble State Commission passed the order dated 10.8.2011 directing the Op/JDs to execute the sale deed of the property in favour of the appellant within two months after the receipt of copy of the order. But, against that order dated 10.8.2011, the OP/JD filed appeal before the Hon’ble National Commission, which was dismissed and again filed an appeal against that order of Hon’ble National Commission before the Hon’ble supreme Court of India, which was also dismissed and thereafter the orders under execution have already been complied with on 12.3.2015
4. The very purpose of filing of the execution application under section 27 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 is to get the order complied with, which the same has already been complied with by the Op/JD. We may mention here that the complainant/DH was also to submit the typed sale deed after depositing the registration charges which are to the tune of Rs.72,500/- which the complainant/DH has only deposited on 4.3.2015. As soon as the complainant/DH deposited the amount of Rs.72,500/- in State Bank of India, the Op/JD has got registered the sale deed in favour of the complainant on 12.3.2015. As such, as discussed above, the orders of the Hon’ble State Commission stands already complied with and at this stage, no action is required to be taken against the Op/JDs. Accordingly, we dispose of the execution application being fully satisfied as the orders of the Hon’ble State Commission have already been complied with.
5. A copy of this order be supplied to the parties free of cost. File be consigned to records.
Pronounced.
July 17, 2015.
(Sukhpal Singh Gill)
President
(K.C.Sharma)
Member
(Sarita Garg)
Member
Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes
Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.