No. 4/10.11.2009.

HON’BLE JUSTICE SRI A. CHAKRABARTI, PRESIDENT.

Revision Petitioner through Mr. P. Banerjee, the Ld. Advocate and O.P. Mr. Narayan Dey, the Ld. Advocate are present.  Mr. Dey, the Ld. Advocate produces pieces of a complete computer set for the purpose of replacement as was promised earlier.  Mr. Banerjee and his client identified certain pieces to show that those are not new items but are old materials.  In the circumstances we also find that proposal of replacement is not acceptable to the Revisionist.

It appears that protracted litigation continued between the parties including two revisions and the position presently is apparent that the complaint case was disposed of finally providing three stages, one for repairing in default whereof replacement and in default of replacement payment of quantified sum with interest prescribing the period.

It appears that presently impugned order has gone back to consider the repair aspect over again though attempt to repair was found unacceptable and other two options were to be tried.

As today it is apparent that replacement is also not possible and as we find that the matter is pending for a long time and no further purpose will be served in keeping the matter pending for further attempt for replacement, accepting that replacement is not possible, O.P. – JDR is directed to pay the sum of Rs. 17,000/- (seventeen thousand only) to the Complainant – Revisionist along with interest @ 8% per annum from 31.12.2005 till recovery as directed in the original order which admittedly has since reached finality. 

Revisionist will return the old computer to the O.P. – JDR.  The Execution Case will proceed before the Forum in accordance with law and also the observations made hereinabove.

Revision is allowed and the impugned order set aside.  No order as to costs.