State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Brijmohan Dixit vs Samedaut India Ltd on 14 December, 2022
Cause Title/Judgement-Entry STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, UP C-1 Vikrant Khand 1 (Near Shaheed Path), Gomti Nagar Lucknow-226010 First Appeal No. A/2012/2543 ( Date of Filing : 08 Nov 2012 ) (Arisen out of Order Dated in Case No. of District State Commission) 1. Brijmohan Dixit Kakori Street Railway Road Farukkhabad Gram Barirkali Naingaun Mainpuri ...........Appellant(s) Versus 1. Samedaut India Ltd Plot No 57 Shivkot Industrla Complex Ranipet Tamilnadu ...........Respondent(s) BEFORE: HON'BLE MR. SUSHIL KUMAR PRESIDING MEMBER HON'BLE MR. Vikas Saxena JUDICIAL MEMBER PRESENT: Dated : 14 Dec 2022 Final Order / Judgement ORAL State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission U.P. Lucknow. Appeal No. 2543 of 2012 Brijmohan Dixit aged about 48 years s/o Sri Raj Bahadur Dixit, R/o Karori Street, Railway Road, Farrukhabad at present R/o Gram Kharirkari, Tehsil Bhaingaon, District, Mainpuri. ...Appellant. Versus 1- Samedeut Fahar India (Pvt.) Ltd., Plot no.62, Sivkot Industrial Complex, Ranipet, 632403 Tamil Nadu. 2- Owner/Manager, Siwam Auto Sals, Nekpur, 84, Fatehgarh through Proprietor, Shiv Pratap Singh Chauhan, R/o Shetar Colony, Railway Road, Deopura, Mainpuri. 3- Proprietor, Balaji Automobiles, Samendra Tractor, Radharam Road, Mainpuri. ...Respondents. Present:- 1- Hon'ble Sri Sushil Kumar, Presiding Member.
2- Hon'ble Sri Vikas Saxena, Member.
Sri Brijendra Chaudhary, Advocate for appellant.
Sri Arun Tandan, Advocate for respondents.
Date 14.12.2022 JUDGMENT Per Sri Sushil Kumar, Member- This appeal has been directed against the order dated 10.10.2012 passed by the ld. District Forum, Mainpuri on the application filed by the complainant/decree holder to restore the execution misc case no.22 of 2011.
We have heard the ld. counsel for both the parties and perused the impugned order.
Complaint case no.101 of 2006 was allowed in favour of the complainant and the opposite party no.2 was directed to pay Rs.40,000.00 to the complainant. Misc. execution no.22 of 2011 was filed before the ld. District Forum which was dismissed on 23.7.2011 on the ground of compromise.
Ld. counsel for the appellant argued that the complainant never entered into any compromise. This question is to be considered and decided by the executing (2) court whether the decree was discharged in full satisfaction or not.
Since the decree holder challenged the question of compromise, therefore, it is appropriate to provide an opportunity to the decree holder/judgment debtor to prove the satisfaction of decree.
ORDER Appeal is allowed. The order passed by the ld. District Forum is hereby set aside.
The parties are directed to appear before the ld. District Forum on 2.1.2023. The ld. District Forum is directed to decide execution misc application no.22 of 2011 on merit by ascertaining the fact whether the decree is satisfied in its perfect sense according to law.
The stenographer is requested to upload this order on the Website of this Commission today itself.
Certified copy of this judgment be provided to the parties as per rules.
(Vikas Saxena) (Sushil Kumar) Member Presiding Member
Judgment dated/typed signed by us and pronounced in the open court.
Consign to record.
(Vikas Saxena) (Sushil Kumar) Member Presiding Member Jafr, PA I Court 3 [HON'BLE MR. SUSHIL KUMAR] PRESIDING MEMBER [HON'BLE MR. Vikas Saxena] JUDICIAL MEMBER