BHAGWAN DAS MAURYA vs Central Bank of India

-THIS is an appeal under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter called the ''Act'') against judgment and order dated 6.9.1997 passed by District Forum, Deoria in execution case No. 7 of 1995 arising out of Complaint No. 1996 of 1991.

INITIALLY a complaint was filed bearing No. 96 of 1991 which was decided on 24.11.1992 whereby learned District Forum directed the respondents to give 692 dollars in Indian currency @ Rs. 30/- per dollar along with interest @ 12% per annum and Rs. 10,000/- as compensation and Rs. 10,000/- for physical, mental and financial loss. On an application for setting aside the order dated 24.11.1992, the learned District Forum on payment of cost of Rs. 15/- allowed the application and directed the opposite party to file written statement which they failed. Consequently learned District Forum allowed the complaint in presence of the Counsel for respondent on 8.2.1994. The appellant/complainant moved another application under Section 27 of the Act which was registered as Execution Case No. 7 of 1995. On 29.1.1997 the opposite parties moved an application mentioning therein that they have paid Rs. 12,456/- on 28.12.1992 and as such amendment after reviewing the order dated 8.2.1994 is required. Accordingly, the order dated 6.9.1997 has been passed by the learned District Forum which has been challenged in the appeal. Mr. B.K. Upadhyay, learned Counsel for the appellant has been heard and the entire record has been perused very carefully. The impugned order dated 6.9.1997 was criticised on the following grounds : (1) It was not open for the District Forum to have passed three orders dated 24.11.1992, 8.2.1994 and 6.9.1997 on the same cause of action. (2) That in case the opposite party was having any grievance against the order dated 24.11.1997 an appeal under Section 15 of the Act should have been filed which has not been done.

It was also argued that the order dated 24.11.1997 was not subject of review as ordered by the learned District Forum vide order dated 8.2.1994. Finally it was submitted that on merits the impugned order dated 6.9.1997 does not stand.

THE order dated 24.11.1997 passed in Complaint Case No.1996/1991 was an ex parte order and subsequently an application for recalling that ex parte order was made and it was recalled and subsequently after hearing the submissions of the Counsel order dated 8.2.1994 was passed. Subsequently this order was put into execution and in the execution by way of objections the opposite party submitted that 692 dollars which was received in the account of the complainant was converted in Indian currency for a sum of Rs. 12,456/- which was credited in the complainant''s account on 28.12.1992 and as such the execution was not justified. Further request was that it requires review of the order dated 8.2.1994. THE learned District Forum, being of the view that the execution thus was not justifiable, vide order dated 6.9.1997 modified the order dated 8.2.1994 which has been impugned in this appeal. Obviously in view of the fact that on 28.12.1992 692 dollars after conversion into Indian currency worth Rs. 12,456/- has already been deposited in the concerned account of the complainant by the opposite party/bank, the grievance of the complainant is not sustainable. The contrary order was liable to be modified. We see no justification thus to interview with the impugned order.

IT was also argued that the quantum of compensation was changed from step-to-step. Initially the compensation was ordered to be Rs. 20,000/- and then again it was converted to Rs. 2,000/-. We are of the view that there was no deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party. In view of the above fact we do not think it proper to enhance the quantum of compensation. Consequently, the appeal fails. ORDER The appeal is dismissed. In the circumstances of the case there will be no order as to the costs. Appeal dismissed.