DHARMENDRA WANJARI Vs. ANITA RAMBHAU KAPSE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RULE. Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the matter is taken up for final disposal.

(2.) By this petition, the petitioner challenges the order passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Nagpur, (hereinafter referred to as "the State Commission" for short) dtd. 5/11/2024, thereby rejecting the application for condonation of delay in preferring appeal under Sec. 27-A of the Consumer Protection Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act of 1988" for short) against the judgment and order of conviction passed by the Additional District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Nagpur (hereinafter referred to as "the District Commission" for short) for non-compliance of the order dtd. 20/1/2023.

(3.) In a complaint filed by respondent no.1 which came to registered as case No. CC/12/1997 before the District Commission, the petitioner vide order dtd. 20/1/2014 was directed to execute the sale deed in respect of a plot which he agreed to sell to respondent no.1 ; or in the alternative, pay Rs.1,62,000.00 with interest @ 12% per annum from 14/7/2010. Since, the petitioner could not comply the order, the execution proceedings bearing No. EA/15/10 came to be filed under Sec. 27 of the Act of 1988. During pendency of the execution proceedings, the petitioner was taken in custody in July-2022 and ultimately, the District Commission convicted the petitioner by the order dtd. 20/1/2023 for noncompliance of the order dtd. 20/1/2014 of the District Commission He was sentenced to suffer Simple Imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs.25,000.00. Feeling aggrieved by the said order, an appeal came to be filed before the State Commission along with an application for condonation of delay which came to be registered as Misc. Application No. MA/24/82. In the said appeal, an application for suspension of sentence was also filed by the petitioner. No order was passed by the State Commission on the application for suspension of sentence for considerable time. Therefore, the petitioner moved before the Division Bench of this Court by preferring Criminal Writ Petition No. 884/2024 for directions. This Court vide order dtd. 24/10/2024 directed the State Commission to decide the petitioner's application for suspension of sentence within seven working days. The State Commission, on 5/11/2024, instead of deciding the application for suspension of sentence, decided the application for condonation of delay which was already closed for orders. By the said order the State Commission dismissed the application for condonation of delay caused in preferring appeal. Feeling aggrieved by the order of dismissal of delay application, the present writ petition is filed for quashing the impugned order dtd. 5/11/2024.