State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Br.Manager, Madhyanchal Gramin Bank vs Devendra Singh on 14 October, 2019
M. P. STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
PLOT NO. 76, ARERA HILLS, BHOPAL (M.P.)
FA No.1189 / 2019.
Branch Manager,
Madhyanchal Gramin Bank,
Branch - Aron,
District Guna (M.P.). .... APPELLANT.
Versus
1.Shri Rajaram, s/o Shri Udham Singh Raghuwanshi, R/o Village Jakhoda, Post & Tehsil Aron, District Guna (M.P.).
2. Agriculture Insurance Company of India Ltd., M.P. Regional Office, Kwality Globus, First Floor, NH -12, Near Maida Mill, Bhopal. .... RESPONDENTS.
FA No.1304 / 2019.
Branch Manager, Madhyanchal Gramin Bank, Branch - Aron, District Guna (M.P.). .... APPELLANT.
Versus
1. A. Shri Davendra Singh B. Shri Sitaram C. Shri Rajeev All s/o Shri Amar Singh Raghuwanshi, R/o Village - Jakhoda, Post & Tehsil, Aron, District (M.P.).
2. Agriculture Insurance Company of India Ltd., M.P. Regional Office, Kwality Globus, First Floor, NH -12, Near Maida Mill, Bhopal. .... RESPONDENTS.
- 2- As per Shri Justice Shantanu Kemkar, (oral) :
Date of ORDER Order 14.10.2019 Shri Manoj Shahi, learned counsel for the appellant.
Shri Deepesh Shukla, learned counsel for the respondent no.1. Shri Ravindra Tiwari, learned counsel for the respondent no.2. Heard.
2. This order shall govern the disposal of FA No.1304/2019. For the sake of convenience facts are taken from FA No.1189/2019.
3. This appeal is directed against the order dated 14.3.2016 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Guna (for short the "Forum") in Execution Case No.206/14x15.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant has pointed out that the Forum in its original order dated 9.6.2015 passed in CC No.206/2014 issued following directions :-
16- vr% ifjokn vkaf'kd :i ls Lohdkj dh tkrh gS vkSj vuk0 Ø- 2 dks vknsf'kr fd;k tkrk gS fd %& ¼1½ os vkosnd dk dslhlh [kkrk iw.kZ dj {kfriwfrZ dh jkf'k tks vuk0 Ø-1 ls vkosnd dks xzke 'kkys; dh Hkwfe esa cks;h xbZ lks;kchu dh Qly ds laca/k esa izkIr gksuk Fkh mDr jkf'k izfØ;k vuqlkj 02 ekg esa vuk0 Ø-1 ls izkIr dj vkosnd ds [kkrs esa tek djsaA &3& ¼2½ vuk0x.k fnukad 18-09-14 ls vkosnd dks xzke 'kkys; dh Hkwfe ds laca/k esa {kfriwfrZ izkIr gksus dh fnukad rd mDr {kfriwfrZ jkf'k ij 06 izfr'kr okf"kZd dh nj ls C;kt Hkh vnk djsaA ¼3½ vuk0x.k vkosnd dks vfHkHkk"kd 'kqYd 1000@&:0 ¼:-,d gtkj½ o okn O;; 100@& :-¼:-,d gtkj½ Hkh vnk djsaA
3. He submits that the present appellant was opposite party no.2 before the Forum whereas the present respondent no.2 - Insurance Company was opposite party no.1 before the Forum in the original proceedings. He argued that while dealing with the execution application the Forum has ignored the directions contained in the operative part of the said order dated 9.6.2015 passed by it and has gone beyond the said order and imposed the liability on the appellant - Bank for making the payment of compensation awardable in terms of the order dated 9.6.2015. He submits that it is very well settled proposition of law that executing court cannot go behind the decree.
4. On the other hand learned counsel appearing for the respondent no.2 has supported the impugned order and has argued that the Insurance Company cannot be saddled with the liability to pay the compensation when the compensation was already settled and disbursed.
5. We have considered the rival contentions and we have perused the impugned order as also the order dated 9.6.2015 passed in complaint case.
- 4-
6. Suffice it to say that the impugned order is not in conformity with the directions contained in the said order dated 9.6.2015. In our considered view, the Forum has not construed the order dated 9.6.2015 in its correct perspective and has gone beyond it and passed the impugned order, which as has already been stated is not in consonance with the original order. In the circumstance, we have no option but to set-aside the impugned order and remand the case to the Forum for reconsidering the execution application afresh. We order accordingly.
7. All contentions of the parties are kept open. Needless to say that the Forum shall adhere to the directions contained in the order dated 9.6.2015.
8. We expect the Forum to decide the case as expeditiously as possible but, in any case not later than two months from the date of appearance of the parties.
9. Parties are directed to appear before the Forum on 30.10.2019.
10. With the aforesaid directions, both the case are disposed of.
11. This order be retained in FA No.1189/2019 and a copy of the same be placed in the record of FA No.1304/2019.
(Justice Shantanu S. Kemkar) (Dr. Monika Malik) (Prabhat Parashar) PRESIDENT MEMBER MEMBER Phadke