O  R  D  E  R

(By Sri S. Bhaskararao,  Member on behalf of the Bench)

1.         The Dhr / complainant in whose favour of the order was passed filed this petition under Section 27 of C.P. Act for enforcement of order of this Forum.  This Forum  passed an award in favour of the complainant directing the opposite parties to replace the picture tube in the television of the complainant and repair the same and restore the same to its working condition and also to pay compensation of Rs.2,000/- and costs of Rs. 800/- to the complainant.  As the opposite party did not honour the award the dhr / complainant filed this Enforcement Petition. 

2          The 1^st jdr / respondent remained exparte where as 2^nd jdr / respondent filed its counter interalia contending that the company 1^st jdr was closed long back even prior to procurement of the orders and the company  is not producing any articles now.  Since the company is closed and there is no production of components absolutely there is no chance for implementing of the orders with regard to repairing work.  Apart from that after long lapse of 8 years the complainant wants to get the order implemented and as there is inordinate delay the rest of the components in the subject matter would have been destroyed. 

3          So far as the rest of the portion of the award he paid compensation, interest and costs awarded by this Forum along with interest.  Since there is impossibility to perform the rest of the decree, he sought dismissal of the petition.

4          Now the point for determination is:

            Whether the complainant / dhr is entitled to enforcement as sought for?

5          So far as the payment of the amounts awarded to the complainant / dhr he received the same which was endorsed in the petition E.A. No. 1/2014 filed by the 2^nd Jdr  for recalling NBW.  Thus the award part of amount is concerned the same was fulfilled by the jdr herein.

6          So far as the part of the award directing the jdrs to repair and restore the T.V. to its working condition, the contention of 2^nd jdr is that the company of 1^st jdr was closed long back even prior to passing of this order and the performance becomes impossible.  Further the other components in the T.V. might have been destroyed due to lapse of time.

7          Admittedly the order was passed in this case on 22.03.2006 where as the Execution Petition was filed on 04.09.2014 more than 8 years after the orders were passed by this Forum.  There is no guaranty for a person that he may continue his business without sustaining his loss or closing the same during course of his business.  When the award was passed on 22.03.2006 the complainant did not chose to levy any execution petition for enforcing orders of this Forum till 04.09.2014. 

8          Especially when the item to be repair is electronic gadgage he could have approached this Forum earlier in point of time. As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for jdr there is every chance of the other components in the TV might have been destroyed or became useless due to the lapse of long time. 

9          Apart from that when the 2^nd jdr specifically pleaded the company of the 1^st jdr was closed long back and they stopped manufacturing the components the complainant has not placed any material evidencing the existence of the company and its producing the components so as to enable the 2^nd jdr to carry out the directions of this Forum.  Thus when the complainant chose to kept quite for 8 long years.    She has to blame herself for such long delay.  Admittedly there is no alternatively relief given in the order enabling the complainant to receive any amount in the place of the T.V.   Hence as rightly contended by the jdr counsel, the performance of that apart of award becomes impossible.

10        Thus in view of the above said discussion it is clear the remedy of jdr so far as repairs to the TV it becomes impossible.  Hence this point is answered against the dhr / complainant.

11.       In the result, the petition is dismissed in the circumstances without costs.

Dictation taken by the Steno, transcribed by her, corrected and pronounced by us, in open Forum, this the 27^th day of March, 2015.

Sd/-xxxx                                                                                                              Sd/-xxxxxxx

MEMBER                                                                                                            PRESIDENT