AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Deepa Sharma, Presiding Member
EA No. 62 of 2018 ( for execution )
This Execution Petition has been filed for the execution of the order dated 04.12.2015 of this Commission in Revision Petition No. 2131 of 2015.
A complaint had been filed by the complainant before the District Forum and the said complaint was decreed in his favour. An appeal was filed before the State Commission and the State Commission remanded the matter back to the District Forum. District Forum passed the fresh order dated 17.12.2014 in the complaint. Against this order, the complainant filed an appeal before the State Commission and the State Commission disposed of the said Appeal vide order dated 15.05.2015. This order was impugned by the Judgment Debtor before this Commission in RP No. 2131 of 2015. The said revision petition was disposed of by this Commission vide order dated 04.12.2015. The said order reads as under:
“1. Learned counsel for the petitioner present. Complainant /respondent No. 1 in person present and learned counsel for the respondent No. 2 also present.
Arguments heard. The complainant has not complied with the order dated 30.10.2015.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner went to complainant’s house to take the vehicle but the complainant refused to hand over the vehicle. He also sought the police assistance. Shri Surinder Singh, the complainant is not agree. The petitioner has taken extra activities, which find no mention no in our order. SDM and police have nothing to do with this case.
The orders passed by the courts below are hereby set aside. Another opportunity is granted to the respondent/complainant, Shri Surinder Singh that he will handover the vehicle to the opposite parties within this week. The OP will make the car roadworthy. Surinder Singh will get the vehicle checked from his mechanic.
Learned counsel for the opposite party No. 2 himself admits that the vehicle was rectified for a number of times. Shri Surinder Singh, the complainant submits that car remained with the service station of the dealer for a period of six months for repair. The opposite parties, jointly and severally, will pay a sum of Rs.1,25,000/- to the complainant within one month from today failing which, it will carry interest @ 9% per annum till its realization. In case, the complainant is satisfied, he will get the car and one year’s warranty or driving the vehicle to the extent of 50000 kms., whichever is earlier, will be given in his favour. The vehicle be handed over to the complainant within 10 days.
All the counsel are satisfied with this order. This order be treated as decree. Whenever, any party has got any objection, it can come to this Commission as an executing court.”
This order was confirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court vide its order dated 05.08.2016 while dismissing the appeal of the complainant i.e. the Decree Holder before this Commission.
In view of direction of this Commission whereby the party had been given right to file execution before this Commission, the Decree Holder had filed the present Execution Petition. In compliance of the decree, sum of Rs.1,25,000/- which was deposited by the Judgment Debtor before the District Forum had been ordered to be released to the Decree Holder. The Decree Holder now insists on the execution of the remaining part of the order dated 04.12.2015.
During the hearing of this Execution Petition on 15.11.2022, the Decree Holder had stated that he cannot take the possession of the vehicle since he cannot ply the vehicle on the road as the vehicle is more than 10 years old since its purchase and in view of the rules and regulations framed by RTO, vehicle cannot be registered.
He requested that the Judgment Debtor be directed to pay him the value of the vehicle.
It is a settled proposition of law that this Commission has no jurisdiction while entertaining an execution application to go behind the decree or to amend or modify the decree. Since the complainant / Decree Holder has refused to take the possession of the subject vehicle, no more directions are needed in this matter. The Execution Petition, therefore stands disposed of in these terms.