JUDGMENT

V. Gopala Gowda, J.

1. Aggrieved by the dismissal of her First Appeal Nos. 645 and 646 of 2013 vide order dated 8.1.2014 by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi, purported to have been filed Under Section 21 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short "the Act"), against the order dated 30.7.2013 passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Lucknow in Appeal Nos. 2082 and 2083 of 2010, the Appellant has filed these appeals, urging various relevant facts and legal contentions seeking for setting aside the said order.

2. The brief facts of the case are stated as under:

The Appellant filed a Complaint No. 24 of 1998 before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Ghaziabad (for short "the District Forum") against Navchetna Sahkari Awas Samiti Ltd.-the Respondent in the original complaint, for not allotting and registering plot No. 114, Village Khoda, Ghaziabad in her name as the Awas Samiti, in a resolution passed by it, cancelled the membership of the Appellant from the Navchetna Sahkari Awas Samiti Ltd. in default of payment by her.

3. The District Forum vide its order dated 17.10.2003 after conducting an enquiry as provided under the provisions of the Act, accepted the complaint of the Appellant and directed the Navchetna Sahkari Awas Samiti Ltd. to allot the said plot in favour of the Appellant and also to register the same in her favour within 3 months from the date of the order.

4. Since, there was non compliance of the order dated 17.10.2003, the Appellant filed Execution Petition before the District Forum to execute the order and requested it to punish the Respondents Under Sections 25 and 27 of the Act. In the said case one Gulab Singh (the alleged subsequent allottee of the plot in question) filed an application in the above proceedings for impleadment before the District Forum as he was in the possession of the plot in question, which was allotted by the Respondents and a Civil Suit No. 1510 of 2005 filed by him was pending in the Civil Court. The District Forum vide its order dated 13.9.2006 held that the order dated 17.10.2003 is null and void. It was further held by the District Forum that the Appellant should approach the Civil Court and only after the rejection of the suit of Gulab Singh in the Civil Court the execution proceedings will be heard by the District Forum and pass appropriate order and rejected the application of impleadment of Gulab Singh.

5. Being aggrieved by the order dated 13.9.2006 of the District Forum, the Appellant filed Appeal No. 2636 of 2006 before the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow (for short "the State Commission"). The State Commission has passed an order dated 7.9.2007 holding that it was not open for the District Forum to review the same matter on merits at the instance of the impleading applicant and declare its earlier decree as null and void. Thus, the State Commission allowed the appeal of the Appellant and directed the District Forum to proceed afresh with the execution proceedings.

6. The said order dated 7.9.2007 of the State Commission was not challenged by the Respondents, but Gulab Singh filed Revision Petition No. 4069 of 2007 before the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi (for short "the National Commission") against the said order.

7. The National Commission, having found either no illegality or material irregularity in the order dated 7.9.2007 passed by the State Commission, dismissed the Revision Petition of Gulab Singh on 12.8.2008 by observing that the State Commission was fully justified in allowing the appeal filed by the Appellant and setting aside the order dated 13.9.2006 passed by the District Forum.

8. The Appellant filed the application for execution of the order dated 17.10.2003 before the District Forum. On 29.5.2010, the District Forum allowed the execution petition directing for compliance of the order dated 17.10.2003. It further directed to prov