State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Balaji Singh vs L.Pradeep Kumar on 18 October, 2022
1
Appeal No.207/2020
Date of filing: 25.02.2020
Date of disposal: 18.10.2022
BEFORE THE KARNATAKA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES
REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BENGALURU (PRINCIPAL BENCH)
DATED:18.10.2022
PRESENT
Mr.K.B SANGANNANAVAR : JUDICIAL MEMBER
Mrs. DIVYASHREE M : LADY MEMBER
APPEAL NO.207/2020
Sri.Balaji Singh,
S/o Late Ram Singh,
Aged about 55 years,
No.138, 1st Floor, 2nd Main,
Shesadripuram,
Bangalore - 560 020. .....Appellant/s
(Advocate - Sri.K.S Kalleshappa)
V/s
Sri.L Pradeep Kumar,
No.51, Maruti Nilaya,
Ground Floor, 8th Main,
Kalappa Block, Srinagar,
Bangalore - 560 050. .....Respondent/s
2
Appeal No.207/2020
ORDER
Mr.K.B SANGANNANAVAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER This is an Appeal filed U/s.27-A of C.P Act, 1986 by JDr in E.P No.222/2018 arising out of complaint No.2409/2012 on the file of Bangalore Urban District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Bangalore aggrieved by the order dated 04.01.2020 passed in E.P No.222/2018.
2. The Commission examined grounds of Appeal, impugned order and proceeds to decide on the Appeal.
3. Appellant filed application U/s.27-A C.P Act, 1986 aggrieved by the order dated 04.01.2020. Let us examine the impugned order, in particular mandate of award passed in CC No.2409/2012 dated 14.12.2017, wherein directed OP/JDr to pay sum of Rs.2,14,037/- to the complainant together with interest at 12% p.a from the date of collecting fees till the date of realization with litigation cost of Rs.10,000/-. The awardee initiated EP for recovery of Rs.3,80,284/-. It is found from the impugned order JDr had paid Rs.2,50,000/- to the Dhr. Thereafter JDr collected all the documents from concerned authorities and filed petition before Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bangalore in MVC No.425/2007 which came to be allowed in part and awarded Rs.10,11,057/- along with interest @ 6% p.a which excludes interest on future medical expenses. Aggrieved by the said award, JDr preferred MFA 3 Appeal No.207/2020 No.5367/2009 and the said MFA came to be dismissed. It is found from the enquiry, during pendency of the said Appeal, Insurance Company deposited 60% of the awarded amount in MVC. However DHr raised consumer complaint in CC No.2409/2012 before the Forum below obtaining the award in MVC No.425/2007. It is also found from impugned order, that Dhr has filed Criminal case in PCR No.24656/2013 on the file of VIII Additional Metropolitan Magistrate at Bangalore for the offence punishable U/s.417, 418, 420, 107 and 120-B of IPC, wherein 'B' report came to be submitted. In addition to that Dhr filed complaint to Bar Council of Karnataka, where JDr appeared and submitted documents and information. The Bar Council of Karnataka held enquiry dismissed the said complaint.
4. According to Appellant, Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain the petition, yet Dhr had suppressed the material facts and misguided the Forum and obtained an award. In view of rival contentions of the parties, executing Forum held executing Forum cannot go beyond the order passed by the Forum, but facts remained that in the decision relied on by the Forum below reported in (1996) 5 SCC 728 in a case of Rameshwar Dass Gupta vs. State of UP and anr., held normally executing court cannot go beyond the decree, it does not mean to say shall not go beyond an award, since shown that award is obtained suppressing facts. In such circumstances the executing Court/Forum is empower to examine and decide whether the consumer complaint raised by complainant/Dhr is still maintainable despite obtaining an award 4 Appeal No.207/2020 in MVC No.425/2007, which is confirmed by Hon'ble High Court in MFA No.5367/2009. In such view of the matter Appellant has to be held made out grounds to interfere in the impugned order. Accordingly proceed to allow the Appeal. Consequently set aside the order dated 04.01.2020 passed in E.P No.222/2018 with a direction to examine legal aspects of the matter namely on the point of jurisdiction to maintain Consumer complaint after obtaining an award in MVC No.425/2007 which was confirmed in MFA No.5367/2009, affording opportunity to both parties as early as possible not later than three months from the date of receipt of the order.
5. Provide copy of this order to the District Commission as well as parties to the appeal.
LADY MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER vln*