The Consumer Forum has the power to enforce its orders by imposing penalties, including imprisonment, for non-compliance, and the enforcement of its orders does not necessarily have to follow the procedure prescribed in the CPC.

Mr. J.B. Koshy, J.—Petitioner in this case challenges Ext. P 5 order of the Ist respondent Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Ernakulam by which arrest warrant against the petitioner herein was ordered. 2nd respondent herein filed a consumer dispute in the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Ernakulam. Petitioner is a distributor of LPG. 2nd respondent has applied for a gas connection in his house. When the application matured, the gas connection was not given. Various reasons were pleaded by the 2nd respondent in not giving the gas connection. Since the gas connection was not given 2nd respondent approached the District Forum. The District Forum allowed the application and directed the petitioner to give gas connection to the 2nd respondent and pay compensation of Rs. 1,000/-. Aggrieved by the above order, petitioner filed appeal before the Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Thiruvananthapuram, the Appellate Authority. In the Appellate Forum it was agreed that petitioner will give gas connection if the 2nd respondent executes a bond that he is not having connection from any other agency. The operative portion of the judgment as can be seen from Ext. PI is as follows :

"......We heard the Counsel for the appellant and also the respondent/complainant. After discussion, it was agreed by both parties that the second opposite party will give connection to the complainant executing a bond saying that he had not taken any connection from any other agency or propose to take any gas connection from any" other agent. This was to be done within a period of one week from today. Thereupon, the connection will be given within 10 days from the date of furnishing the bond."

In spite of the agreement, connection was not given and 2nd respondent filed Ext. P 2 execution petition before the Ist respondent and it was numbered as E.P. No. 78 of 1996 in O.P. No. 559 of 1994. Ext. P3 is the preliminary objection filed by the petitioner. According to the petitioner, gas connection was not given because no bond as agreed was executed in time. It is the case of the petitioner that even though Bharat Petroleum Corporation directed to give connection, the petitioner did not give connection because no bond was executed within seven days of the appellate order. According to the petitioner, since 2nd respondent did not approach within a reasonable time and executed a bond within seven days, he is not bound to give the gas connection. Bharat Petroleum Corporation's letter is dated 18.1.1996. Even after that the petitioner took the stand that since 2nd respondent has not approached him within a reasonable time, he is not bound to give the gas connection. It is also stated in Ext. P3 that now the 2nd respondent resides beyond the territorial limits allotted to him and he cannot carry out the direction. The contentions raised by the petitioner were considered elaborately by the Ist respondent-District Forum. Petitioner was given ten days' time to give gas connection to the 2nd respondent and report by 26.6.1996 and the case was posted on 26.7.1996 for reporting the above. Thus, ten more days were given to the petitioner for implementing the order. Petitioner did not implement the order nor did he appear on 26.6.1996 and by Ext. P5 order it is stated that the Ist respondent (petitioner in the O.P.) has not complied with the order. He was absent and, therefore, it was decided to issue warrant against him. Contention of the petitioner is that direction to issue warrant by the Ist respondent is totally without jurisdiction. It is contended by the petitioner that Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum have only powers which are specifically conferred by the Statute under Section 25 of the Consumer Protection Act. It can be enforced as if it is a decree or order made by a Court in a suit. Therefore, order of a Forum can be enforced as if it is a decree and the Forum cannot enforce its decree in its own and cannot direct to issue warrant. It was also