STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, MAHARASHTRA, MUMBAI Appeal No.A/23/179 (Arisen out of order dated 20/01/2023 in EA/11/19 IN CC/09/47 passed by the District Consumer Commission, Central Mumbai)

Mr.Pujit Aggarwal ....... Appellant/

901-B, The Angle, Krishna Sanghi Path org.OP no.2 Gamdevi, Mumbai 400 007 Versus

1.Smt.Shardabai Nayak Thru’ P.A.Mr.Ramakrishna Nayak R/o.Sulochna Niwas, Room Natwar Nagar, Road no.1 Jogeshwari (E),Mumbai 400 060 …..Respondent/org.complainant

2.Orbit Corporation Ltd. (In Liquidation) Through Official Liquidator, High Court

5^th floor, Bank of India Building ………Respondents/org.OPs M.G.Road, Fort, Mumbai 400 001

3.Mr.Mahendra Aithe Official Liquidator, having office at

5^th floor, Bank of India Building M.G.Road, Fort, Mumbai 400 001 Justice S.P.Tavade – President BEFORE:

Vijay C.Premchandani – Member PRESENT: Adv.Anand V. Patwardhan is present for appellant.

Adv.U.B.Wavikar a/w. Adv.Devul Dighe are present for respondent no.1.

FINAL ORDER/JUDGMENT (Dt.14/01/2025)

Per Hon’ble Member Mr.Vijay C. Premchandani

1. The appellant has filed the present appeal u/sec.73 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 against the order dated 20/01/2023 passed by the Ld.District Consumer Commission, Central Mumbai in Execution Application no.19 of 2011. The Ld.District Consumer Commission has passed an award against the accused no.2- Mr.Pujit Aggarwal by which he is convicted under section 255(2) of Criminal Procedure Code for the offence punishable under section 27 (1) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and sentenced to suffer Simple Imprisonment for two years and nine months & with fine of Rs.10,000/- to be payable to the applicant within one month from the date of the order and if the accused No.2 failed to pay the said fine within given time to the applicant then accused No.2 will have to suffer more 3 months of rigorous imprisonment.

2. The Accused No.1 Company in liquidation represented by accused No.3 official liquidator, was acquitted under section 255(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code in the aforesaid execution application. Being aggrieved with the above mentioned order, the accused no.2-Mr.Pujit Aggarwal has preferred this appeal.

Brief facts of the case-

3. The original complainant/respondent no.1 herein obtained order from the Ld.District Consumer Commission in consumer complaint no.47/2009 vide order dated 17/01/2011 against the accused nos.1 & 2, wherein the opponent company was directed to hand over the possession of the shop with Occupancy Certificate and Completion Certificate and conveyance in favour of the complainant within a period of one month from the date of receiving copy of the order. As the opponents failed to arrange for temporary shop to the complainant, the opponents were directed to pay Rs.3500/- from January 2009 till handing over possession of the shop with interest @ 18% p.a. thereon and also awarded compensation of Rs.1 lakh towards the mental agony and loss of income. The said order was not duly complied by the present appellant and its company, therefore, the execution application bearing no.EA/11/19 was filed before the Ld.District Consumer Commission for non-compliance of the order u/sec.27 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

4. Both the parties appeared in the proceedings. In the meanwhile, the company went into liquidation and the liquidator was appointed Under Section 319 of Cr.P.C. The Official Liquidator of the company was added as accused no.3 in the execution proceedings, wherein the Official Liquidator represented the Accused no.1 company. After hearing both the sides, perusing the evidence and recording the statement, the Ld.District Consumer Commission has convicted the present appellant as stated herein above.

5. The first appeal was admitted and the notice was issued to the respondents. The respondent no.1 appeared. We heard both the sides at length. We pass following order with the reasoning and law discussed herein below.

LAW & REASONING –

6. The present appellant has prefer