ORDER

S.B. Mhase, President - Heard both the parties.

This is a common judgment being delivered in Appeal No. 1190/2009 and suo motu Revision Petition No. 35/2010.

2. This appeal is directed against the order passed by District Consumer Forum, Mumbai Suburban on 22.9.2009 below Misc. Appl. No. RA/24/2007 arising out of original consumer complaint No. 206/2006 decided on 21.12.2006. By this order, application filed by the appellant seeking time for compliance of an offer which was given by the appellant to the complainant was rejected and thereafter, District Consumer Forum directed to issue non-bailable warrant of arrest returnable on 26.10.2009 as against the appellant. This order of issuance of a warrant is under challenge.

3. During pendency of this appeal, prima facie, the State Commission has noticed that the proceedings which are being carried out by the District Consumer Forum, Mumbai Suburban are not in accordance with the provisions of Sections 25 and 27 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as the Act for brevity) and therefore, by a detailed order dated