Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(SCDRC) 5862
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, MAHARASHTRA, MUMBAI
S.P. Tavade, President, Vijay C. Premchandani, Member
VYANKATESH VIJAY BUILDERS – Appellant
Versus
SHRI ALIAS KUNDAN KAUNDINYA RUPGIR GOSAVI – Respondent
APPEAL No.AE/8/2025|EA/14/149|CC/12/219
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Bahraiz Irani, Afrin Dalal, Amit Padwal, Anosh Irani, Afreen Bano
For the Respondents: Uttam R. Dhawale
Willful non-compliance of a final order passed by a consumer forum warrants punishment under Section 27 of the Consumer Protection Act to uphold consumer rights and deter similar conduct.
Headnote:The appeal was filed under Section 73(1)(a) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, challenging an order passed under Section 27 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The case pertains to the non-compliance of a 2014 order directing a developer to provide specific amenities in a redevelopment project. The lower forum had sentenced the appellants to two years of simple imprisonment and a fine for failing to execute the original directions. The primary issue was whether the quantum of punishment was justified given the appellants' claims of substantial compliance and the existence of external obstructions, such as illegal constructions by other flat owners. The court reasoned that since the original order had reached finality under Section 24 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, and deliberate non-compliance was established, the punishment was necessary to uphold the spirit of consumerism and protect consumer rights. The appeal is dismissed, and the impugned order convicting the accused is upheld.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. procedural history of consumer complaint and subsequent execution proceedings. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. arguments regarding substantial compliance and external hurdles preventing full execution. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 3. final submissions on the quantum of punishment and the validity of the conviction. (Para 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24) |
| 4. legal reasoning on the finality of orders and the necessity of penalizing deliberate non-compliance. (Para 25 , 26) |
FINAL ORDER
(Dt.24/06/2026)
Per Hon’ble Vijay C.Premchandani – Member
1. The present appeal is filed under section 73(1)(a) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 against the order passed by the Ld.District Consumer Forum, Pune in Execution Application no.EA/14/149 on 10/10/2025, wherein the Ld.District Consumer Forum has imposed a fine of Rs.2,500/- on each of the appellant and remanding them for simple imprisonment for a period of two years for non-compliance of the order passed in the original consumer complaint no.CC/12/219 dated 07/08/2014.
The facts of the present appeal:-
2. On 04.05.2000, the Respondent/Original Complainant and his co-owners executed a Development Agreement with the Appellant No. 1 (Developer) for redevelopment of CTS No. 342, Rasta Peth, Pune, under which the Respondent was allotted Flat Nos. 12 and 13 along with one shop. In the year 2005, The Appellants handed over possession of the allotted flats and shop to the Respondent and his family members. In the year 2012, the Respondent filed Consumer Complaint No. CC/12/219 before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Pune, alleging deficiency in service by the Appellants regarding amenities such as, lift, water connection, safety grills, completion certificate, fire-fighting equipment, parking, etc. The Appellants filed Written Notes of Arguments opposing the complaint, contending that the Respondent was not a consumer and that the alleged amenities were not part of the Development Agreement. On 07.08.2014, the Ld. District Forum, Pune passed an Order allowing the complaint, directing the Appellants to provide various amenities (lift, water connection, safety grills, fire-fighting equipment, etc.), execute the Apartment Deed, and pay Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation. In the year 2014, the Respondent filed Execution Application No. EA/14/149 before the Ld. District Forum for alleged non-compliance of the Order dated 07.08.2014.
3. 27.07.2018, the Ld. District Forum passed an Order appointing a Court Commissioner to inspect the premises and report on the compliance status. On 22.08.2018, the Court Commissioner conducted inspection of the premises in the presence of both parties and their advocate. On 03.01.2019, the Court Commissioner submitted his Report to the Ld District Forum noting substantial compliance by the Appellants and highlighting illegal constructions by several flat holders, including the Respondent. On 20.06.2022, The Ld. District Forum allowed Execution Application EA/14/149, holding the Appellants guilty under Section 27(1) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, and sentenced each Appellant to 3 months' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs.50,000/- each. In the year 2022, being aggrieved, the Appellants filed Appeal No. A/22/428 before the Hon'ble State Commission under Section 73 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 challenging the Order dated 20.06.2022. On 06.07.2024, The Hon'ble State Commission partly allowed the Appeal, set aside the fine, and remanded the matter to the District Forum solely on the question of quantum of punishment for reconsideration in accordance with law. On 12.02.2025, the Pune Municipal Corporation issued a Notice to Appellant No.1 under the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1996 , regarding unauthorized constructions on the subject property. On 10.10.2025, the Ld. District Forum, upon remand, passed the Impugned Order in EA/14/149, sentencing each Appellant to 2 years' simple imprison
