National Consumer Disputes Redressal
M/S. Aadharshila Builders & Anr. vs M. Suryakantham & 6 Ors. on 22 March, 2017
NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION NEW DELHI APPEAL EXECUTION NO. 9 OF 2017 (Against the Order dated 20/01/2017 in Complaint No. 24/1998 of the State Commission Andhra Pradesh) 1. M/S. AADHARSHILA BUILDERS & ANR. THROUGH ITS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE SH. RAJESH SINGH, R/O.-3-4-714/A, NARAYANA GUDA, HYDERABAD- ANDHRA PRADESH 2. RAJESH SINGH S/O. LATE SH. RAMCHANDER SINGH, R/O. 12-1-345/1, DATTA NAGAR, ASIFNAGAR, HYDERABAD-500028 ...........Appellant(s) Versus 1. M. SURYAKANTHAM & 6 ORS. W/O. LATE M. SURYANARAYANA, R/O. AT 9-60, MALKAJGIRI, HYDERABAD 2. SMT. M. SURYAKANTHAM W/O. LATE M. SURYANARAYANA, R/O. AT 9-60, VENKATESWARA NAGAR, MALKAJGIRI, HYDERABAD ANDHRA PRADESH 3. M. MACHI RAJU S/O. M. SURYANARAYANA R/O. AT 9-60, VENKATESWARA NAGAR, MALKAJGIRI, HYDERABAD ANDHRA PRADESH 4. C. SURYA PADMAKUMARI S/O. LATE M. SURYANARAYANA R/O. AT 9-60, VENKATESWARA NAGAR, MALKAJGIRI, HYDERABAD ANDHRA PRADESH 5. M. VISWESWARA RAO S/O. LATE M. SURYANARAYANA, R/O. AT 9-60, VENKATESWARA NAGAR, MALKAJGIRI, HYDERABAD ANDHRA PRADESH 6. SMT. SHAKUNTHALAMMA GOVINDA REDDY H NO. 2-2-1167/8/14, TILAK NAGAR, HYDERABAD-500044 ANDHRA PRADESH 7. SHRI AALOK C.L. TIWARI, S/O. C.L. TIWARI, 3-4-714/A, NARAYANAGUDA, HYDERABAD ANDHRA PRADESH ...........Respondent(s)
BEFORE: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.K. JAIN,PRESIDENT
For the Appellant : Mr. Kushagra Pandey, Advocate
Mr. Ashutosh Jha, Advocate For the Respondent :
Dated : 22 Mar 2017 ORDER
These Execution Appeals, by Opposite Parties No. 2 and 3, namely, Aadharshila Builders and Rajesh Singh, are directed against two orders, both dated 15.12.2016, passed by the Telangana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission at Hyderabad (for short "the State Commission") in Execution Applications No. 39/2012 and 3/2013 in Complaint Cases No. 24/1998 and 26/1998 respectively. By the impugned orders, the State Commission has directed issue of non-bailable warrants against all the Opposite Parties, including the Appellants herein, as no one had appeared for them when the case was taken up on the said date.
Learned Counsel appearing for the Appellants states, on instructions, that Opposite Party No.3, i.e. Rajesh Singh, Appellant No.2 herein, shall appear before the State Commission in the Execution proceedings on his own behalf as well as on behalf of the OP Firm.
In view of the statement, these Execution Appeals are disposed of with a direction that till the next date of hearing, i.e. 24.03.2017, the non-bailable warrants issued against the Appellants in terms of the impugned orders shall not be executed. It is clarified that if Rajesh Singh fails to appear before the State Commission in terms of the statement made on his behalf before me, it will be open to the State Commission to take appropriate steps to secure his presence. Needless to add that I have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the final orders, subject matter of Execution Applications No. 39/2012 and 3/2013.
Both the Execution Appeals stand disposed of in the above terms.
......................J D.K. JAIN PRESIDENT