ORDER

ORDER (ORAL)         

IA 14858 of 2017 (condonation of delay)

          Heard.  In the interest of justice and since there is no one on behalf of the Respondents to oppose the application, the application is allowed and the delay is condoned.

APPEAL

          Arguments heard on this Appeal.

2.      The present Appeal has been filed against the order dated 05.06.2017 of State consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Punjab at Chandigarh (for short “the State Commission”) on the ground that the impugned order is perverse and against the order under execution.

3.      It is submitted on behalf of the Appellant that vide the final order in the Complaint No.89 of 2013 the State Commission had directed to allot the plot at current reserved price.  It is submitted that in the impugned order, while interpreting the same in Execution No.21 of 2015, the executing State Commission has directed to pay the reserve price.  It is argued that there is a lot of difference in the current reserved price and the reserve price.  It is argued that the executing State Commission could not have

-3-

travelled beyond the directions given in the final order on the Complaint and therefore, the impugned order is