GIAN SINGH BIRDIREVISIONIS Vs. ADMINISTRATOR UT CHANDIGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a revision filed against order dated 13.8.2003 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-II [for short hereinafter referred to as the District Forum] in Execution Case No.226 of 2002. The execution case arises out of the complaint case bearing No.69 of 2001 'gian Singh Birdi V/s. Administrator, U. T. through its Advisor'. The appeal filed against the order deciding the complaint case was decided by this Commission and the Chandigarh Administration, the repondent, filed a revision petition bearing No.541 of 2003, Asstt. Estate Officer, U. T. , Chandigarh V/s. Gian Singh Birdi, against that order before the Hon'ble National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi [for short hereinafter referred to as the National Commission]. A copy of the order is already on record of the case showing that the Hon'ble National Commission has admitted the revision petition for hearing.

(2.) Resultantly, the entire controversy raised in the complaint case is before the Hon'ble National Commission in the revision petition. Mr. Gian Singh Birdi, Advocate says that this revision petition has now been de-listed by the Hon'ble National Commission. Be that as it may, the fact remains that the execution proceeding is the outcome of the order passed by the District Forum, which has been affirmed by this State Commission and against which order, the revision petition mentioned above is pending before the Hon'ble National Commission. The order which is now impugned in the revision petition here would be effected by a final outcome of the Revision Petition No.541 of 2003, pending before the Hon'ble National Commission.

(3.) Apart from it, two revision petitions are now in existence inasmuch as the Revision Petition No.541 of 2003 is before the Hon'ble National Commission and now an order of the District Forum passed in the execution proceeding has been taken in revision before this State Commission. In our considered view, it may not be appropriate for this State Commission to take up this revision petition arising out of the execution case particularly when the Hon'ble National Commission is already ceased of the matter in the Revision Petition No.541 of 2003.