Plea withdrawn from HC for alternate remedy before Consumer Forum

Plea withdrawn from HC for alternate remedy before Consumer Forum

ON JUSTICE Vasanti Naik and Justice CVBhadang pointing out at the High Court, availability of alternate remedy before the Consumer Forum, on behalf of the petitioner Dilip Rukmangad, at present resident alAurangabad Court's permission was sought to withdraw the petition and the same was granted to him. The petition was filed to seek directions for execution of final order of August 26, 2009 and thereby asking District Forum for con-sumerdisputes' rcdressal toexe-cute the sale deed on behalf of all 11 non-applicants to execute thesaledeedinfavourofthepeti-tioner.

The petitioner has also prayed for quashing and setting aside the order passed by the District Consumer Forum onApril 29,2014, in Execution Application - Dilip Hukmangad Vs Sunilchandra Agrawal and 11 others. 1 le also wants appropriate directions for execution of saledeed by the Forum in favour of the petitioner as per the ready-reckoner rales prevailing in the year 2009 in the interest of justice. I le had also sought contempt proceedings against the Forum.

OnAugusl2fi. 2009, the District forum directed the builder-partners to execute registered sale deed in favour of the petitioner. On November 11, 2009, the petitioner had filed execution application for execution of final order passed bv the District Forum.

On September II, 2012 the District Forum passed orders partially, only referring to the execution proceedings to the Collector for recovery of Rs 8,000. The aggrieved petitioner moved 1 ligh Court on February 3 last and the Court directed the District Forum to consider prayer of the petitioner for execution of saledced in favour of the petitioner, in accordance with law. On April 29, 2014. the District Forum rejected the petitioner's application for execution on the ground that the District Porum has no powers to execute sale deed in the petitioner's favour. This order led to filing of this petition, which now stands withdrawn. The petitioner was seeking answers from the High Court to these legal points: Whether District Porum can reject/refuse to execute final order on the ground that it has no power/ jurisdiction to execute final order? Whether judgment and order passed by the Stale Consumer Commission amounts to "precedent"? Whether underlying principles of Cr PC are applicable to District Forum in execution of final order?

Adv R S Kurekar appeared for ihepetitioner.AGPNitin Rao represented State.

Posted in: News 2014