C.A.@ SLP(C)No.17357/2013

REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 11969 OF 2018 [Arising out of S.L.P.(C)No.17357 of 2013]

H.K. Singla   ... Appellant

Versus

Avtar Singh Saini & Ors. ... Respondents

W I T H

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 11970-11972 OF 2018 [Arising out of S.L.P.(C)Nos.17360-17362 of 2013]

A N D

CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 11973-11974 OF 2018 [Arising out of S.L.P.(C)Nos.17358-17359 of 2013]

J U D G M E N T

R. Subhash Reddy, J.

1. These appeals are filed by the appellants, aggrieved

by  the  order  dated  08.11.2012  passed  in  First  Appeal

Nos.652/12;  653/12;  654-656/12;  657/12  by  the  National

Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi.  For the

sake  convenience  and  brevity,  the  facts  of  the  appeal

1

C.A.@ SLP(C)No.17357/2013

preferred against Appeal No.657/12 are being referred to.

The said appeal is preferred against the order passed by the

State Commission by way of interim order pending the appeal.

These  appeals  were  filed  in  the  year  2013.  At  first

instance,  this  Court  has  passed  orders  granting  stay  of

arrest of the appellant herein on 22.03.2013 and the said

order continued from time to time.

2. The appellant herein was Secretary of Chandigarh State

Bank of Patiala Employees Co-operative USE Thrift & Credit

Society.   We  are  informed  that  the  said  society  is  in

liquidation  and  a  liquidator  is  appointed.   The  first

respondent  herein  filed  a  complaint  before  the  District

Forum  and  the  society  was  directed  to  pay  the  maturity

amount along with the interest @ 10% per annum in addition

to  the  award  of  Rs.10,000/-  by  way  of  compensation  and

Rs.5000/- by way of costs.  Aggrieved by the order of the

District Forum, it appears that the society has preferred

appeal before the State Commission and the order of the

District  Forum  was  upheld  and  appeal  was  dismissed  by

imposing the costs of Rs.5000/- and the said order of the

appellate forum has become final.

2

C.A.@ SLP(C)No.17357/2013

3. Alleging that the society has not paid the maturity

amount along with the interest as ordered by the District

Forum, the first respondent herein has approched the Distrct

Forum by way of application under Section 27 of the Consumer

Protection  Act,  1986.   The  District  Forum  sentenced  the

appellant  herein  to  two  years’  simple  imprisonment  and

imposed a fine of Rs.5000/-.  It was further ordered that in

case  of  failure  to  deposit  the  fine,  appellant  has  to

undergo further simple imprisonment for a period of three

months.

4. Aggrieved  by  the  order  of  the  District  Forum  under

Section  27  of  the  Consumer  Protection  Act,  1986,  the

appellant  herein  has  preferred  appeal  before  the  State

Commission  and  the  State  Commission  has  passed  interim

orders, subject to condition of depositing the entire amount

as ordered by the District Forum within a period of eight

weeks from the date of passing of the order.

5. Aggrieved  by  the  order  of  the  State  Commission,  at

first instance the society has filed a Revision Petition

before  the  National  Commission  and  the  said  Revision

Petition was subsequently withdrawn by seeking liberty to

3

C.A.@ SLP(C)No.17357/2013

file the appeal.  After withdrawal of the Revision Petition,

the appeals were filed and the said appeals were dismissed

by common order dated 08.11.2012.  The operative portion of

the order passed by the National Commission reads as under:

“Appellant  had  shown  his  inability  to  pay  the decretal  amount.   Under  the  circumstances,  the District  Forum  convicted  the  appellant  and sentenced him to Simple Imprisonment of two years. Appellant  filed  the  appeal  before  the  State Commission.  State Commission by an interim order stayed operation of the order of the District Forum subject to deposit of the entire decreetal amount. We do not find any infirmity in the interim order passed by the State Commission.  The decree passed against the appellant attained finality.  Under the circumstances, District Forum under Section 27 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 had no other option other than to convict the appellant.  The State Commission has rightly stayed the operation of the impugned order subject to deposit of the entire decretal amount.  Dismissed.”

6. We have heard the learned counsels for the appellant

and the first respondent and perused the counter affidavit

and rejoinder and other material placed on record.

7. Section  27  of  the  Consumer  Protection  Act,  1986

empowers  the  District  Forum,  State  Commission,  National

Commission  to  impose  the  penalties.   It  empowers  the

authorities  to  pass  an  order  to  punish  a  person  with

imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than one

4

C.A.@ SLP(C)No.17357/2013

month but which may extend to three years or with a fine, in

case a trader or a person against whom the complaint is

made, fails or omits to comply with any order passed by the

authorities.

8. In  this  case,  it  is  to  be  noticed  that  it  is  the

allegation  of  the  respondent/complainant,  that  he  had

deposited the money with the society and society had not

repaid  the  amount  with  interest,  as  assured.   The

application  under  Section  27  is  filed  by  showing  the

appellant as Secretary of the society. When the order of

imprisonment was passed by the District Forum, the appellant

herein has filed appeal before the State Commission.  It

appears from the record that when he sought interim relief

before the State Commission, State Commission has passed the

interim  order  granting  stay,  subject  to  condition  of

depositing the entire amount.  In view of the condition

imposed, the appellant approached the National Commission by

way of appeal which is dismissed by impugned order.

9. In this appeal, it is to be noticed that there is no

order passed against the appellant herein by the District

Forum in its individual capacity.  The appellant was shown

5

C.A.@ SLP(C)No.17357/2013

as Secretary of the Society during the relevant period.  For

the default committed by the society, and in absence of any

personal liability imposed on the appellant, the appellant

is to be imprisoned under Section 27 of the Act is doubtful.

In view of the pendency of the appeal filed before the State

Commission, we do not wish to record any definite finding on

the same.  Prima facie, we are of the view that for the

default committed by the society no order for imprisonment

can be ordered against the appellant herein.  On filing

these  appeals  in  the  year  2013,  this  Court  has  passed

interim order granting stay of arrest and the said order

continued from time to time.

10. In  these  circumstances,  we  deem  it  appropriate  to

dispose of these appeals by suspending the order of the

District  Forum  to  the  extent  of  imprisonment  of  the

appellant  herein,  during  the  pendency  of  the  appeal

preferred by the society before the State Commission.  It is

open to the State Commission to consider the plea whether

the appellant can be imprisoned or not in absence of any

order by the District Forum imposing personal liability on

the appellant.  As appeals are of 2012, we request the State

6

C.A.@ SLP(C)No.17357/2013

Commission to dispose of the appeals as expeditiously as

possible.

11. As we are informed that society is in liquidation and

a liquidator is appointed, we keep it open to the first

respondent to take necessary steps in accordance with law to

recover  the  amount,  which  is  ordered  to  be  paid  by  the

District Forum.

12. All these appeals are disposed of with the directions

as indicated above, with no order as to costs.

.................... J. [Uday Umesh Lalit]

.................... J. [R. Subhash Reddy]

New Delhi December 14, 2018

7