KAJAL PATTANAIK Vs. GIRIJA SHANKAR ROUT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two revision petitions arise from two orders one in execution and other on merit, emanating from a common order passed by the District Forum on 26.4.2001, wherein the respondent No. l Girija Shankar Rout had filed a complaint against the petitioner as also the respondent Nos. 2 and 3.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated the facts leading to filing the complaint were, that the complainant Girija Shankar Rout had purchased a mini -rice mill from the opposite party Nos. 1 and 2 financed by the OP No. 3, i.e., Orissa State Financing Corporation. When this machine did not perform well, matter was taken up with the petitioner and when the issue was not getting settled a complaint was filed before the District Forum, who after hearing the parties, passed the order in following terms:

(3.) AGAINST this order, an appeal was filed before the State Commission, wherein the State Commission vide order dated 29.11.2002 dismissed the appeal filed by the petitioner with the modification, that OP Nos. 1 and (2) before the District Forum will be jointly and severally liable to replace the machinery within a period of three months from the delivery of communication. Against which it appears that Miscellaneous Application Case No. 19/2002 was filed arising out of the order passed by the District Forum, which was dismissed by the State Commission vide order dated 14.1.2003. It appears that another revision petition was also filed before the State Commission, which was disposed of vide order dated 31.3.2004. A perusal of the order will make it clear that this order was passed in execution proceedings.