SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2008(4) CPR 244
MAHARASHTRA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, MUMBAI
P.N. Kashalkar, Presiding Judicial Member and Smt. S.P. Lale, Member
Shri Nitin Brijlal Jaju —Appellant
versus
Malan Pandurang Mali & Ors. —Respondents
First Appeal No. 921/2008 in Recovery Application No. 116/207 in Consumer Complaint No. 508/2005
Decided on 16.10.2008

Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Appellant:Ms. Priti Walimbe, Advocate.
For the Respondents: None

IMPORTANT POINT
Once it is found that order of the District Forum has been fully complied with by the judgment debtor, the Forum is duty bound to recall it’s order of sentence and fine and direct jail authority to release him forthwith.

Headnote:Consumer Protection Act, 1986—Section 27—Recall of its own order by the District Forum—Judgment debtor did not comply with the order passed by the District Forum—Sent to jail—District Forum empowered to recall its order sending him jail immediately when the order is complied with by the judgment debtor—Power to recall it’s own order inherent and implicit in the power given to the District Forum under Section 27 of the Act. (Para 6)

       Result: Appeal allowed.

ORDER

P.N. Kashalkar, J.— Being aggrieved by the order of sentence and fine passed by the District Forum, Solapur in Recovery Application No. 116/2007 dated 7.6.2008 whereby J.D.No. 2 has been sentenced to suffer simple imprisonment for two years and to pay fine of Rs. 5,000 for having not complied with the order passed by the District Forum, Solapur in Complaint No. 508/2005, Shri Jajul /J.D. No. 2 has filed this appeal U/s 27(A) of Consumer Protection Act.

2. Briefly, facts are as under:

3. Malan Pandurang Mali had filed Consumer Complaint No. 508/2005 against Krishna Grahak Sahakari Sanstha Limited, Barshi, District, Solapur and against its 12 Directors. Shri Nitin Brijlal Jaju was the Chairman of the said credit society. Order came to be passed against Society and its Directors on 24.8.2006. That order was not complied with by the Krishna Grahak Sahakari Sanstha Limited, Barshi or its Chairman or Directors, so R.A.116/2007 was filed against the judgment debtors which included Shri Nitin Brijlal Jaju, the Chairman of the credit Society who was original O.P. No.2. On 7.6.2008, in the recovery proceeding Nitin Jaju appeared in a proceeding U/s 27 of Consumer Protection Act, the learned District Forum asked him some questions and when it was found that he himself or his society had not complied with the order passed by the District Forum regarding repayment of deposit of Rs. 80,000 with interest at the rate of 13% per annum, the Forum below passed impugned order sentencing Shri Nitin Jaju to two years simple imprisonment and also directed to pay fine of Rs. 5,000 and immediately sent the said person to jail to suffer the sentence the said Jaju through his father had filed this appeal U/s 27(A) of Consumer Protection Act,1986.

4. On 5.7.2008, we heard Ms. P.P. Walimbe, Adv. We issued notice before admission to the respondents and passed interim order directing the appellant to deposit half of the decretal amount and to execute personal bond of Rs. 80,000 and to furnish surety bond in the like amount and directed that he be released forthwith from jail and his sentence was suspended for the time being, Certified copy of this order was taken by the appellant to the District Forum and to the jail authority. However, neither District Forum nor the jail authorities released Nitin Jaju from jail and till today he is languishing in jail. Jail authorities insisted that as per order of this Commission Mr. Jaju must furnish personal bond and surety bond of Rs. 80,000 besides deposit of half of the decreetal amount. The Forum below did not pass any order in terms of interim order passed by this Commission on 5.7.2008 and further order passed by us on 22.7.2008.

5. Today Ms. Walimbe learned counsel for the appellant brought to our notice the fact that her client has paid whole of the decreetal amount to the complainant and therefore the complainant filed pursis dated 3.10.2008 before District Forum, Solapur and by that pursis, it was informed that the decree holder was not interested to prosecute recovery application and recovery application as such should be dismissed. The Forum below passed order on 3.10.2008 in terms of the said pursis and disposed of Recovery Application No.116/2007. However, what it pertinent to note is the fact that even after recovery proceeding were disposed of or filed having been fully satisfied in terms of payment made to the complainant by the judgment debtor, still the learned District From did not think it fit and proper to issue directions to the jail authority to release Nitin Jaju forthwith from jail. But the Forum below allegedly expressed its inability before the counsel for the judgment debtor (Nitin Jaju) that they were unable to do anything and consequential action will have to be taken by the State Commission where appeal filed on behalf of Nitin Jaju was pending.

6. We are really shocked to find that District Forum found itself helpless, once it sent Nitin Jaju to jail on sentencing him to suffer










Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top