JUSTICE V.K.JAIN, PRESIDING MEMBER (ORAL) The complainants/respondents had filed consumer complaints against the appellants which were allowed by the State Commission with a direction to the appellant to refund the amount received by them from the complainant along-with interest and compensation in terms of the said order.

2. The order passed by the State Commission in the consumer complaint having not been complied the complainants approached the concerned State Commission by way of execution applications. In the execution proceedings the State Commission initially attached the bank account of the appellants. The parties thereafter filed compromise applications before the State Commission containing the terms of the settlement arrived at between them and post-dated cheques in terms of the said settlement were given by the appellants to the complainants. The said cheques, when presented, were dishonoured. The State Commission while disposing of the execution applications as withdrawn/satisfied, had granted liberty to the complainants to get the said execution applications revived if any of the cheques was dishonoured. It was also directed that if any of the cheques was dishonoured the appellant would be liable to pay Rs. 50,000/- for -8- each bounced cheque and the said amount would be deposited with the Consumer Legal Aid Account of the State Commission. It is the afore-said direction of the State Commission for payment of penalty @ Rs. 50,000/- for each dishonoured cheque which is under challenge in these appeals.

3. The submission of the learned counsel for the appellant is that neither Section 25 nor Section 27 of the Consumer Protection Act, gives jurisdiction to the consumer fora to impose penalty of this nature. I am in agreement with the learned counsel for the appellant in this regard. In terms of Section 25(3) of the Consumer Protection Act, the State Commission can issue a recovery certificate to the concerned collector requiring him to recover the amount payable by the appellants to the complainants as arrears of land revenue. In terms of Section 27(1) of the Consumer Protection Act, the State Commission, in case of failure or omission of the appellants to comply with its order, can punish them to imprisonment which would not be less than one month but can exceed upto three years and/or can also impose fine which shall not been less than Rs. 2,000/- but can extend uoto Rs. 10,000/-. Therefore, the order of the State Commission to the extent penalty of Rs. 50,000/- on the dishonour of each cheque was imposed upon the appellants cannot be sustained and the same is accordingly set aside.

4. It is, however, made clear that the complainants shall be entitled to seek enforcement of the order of the State Commission by issuance of a recovery certificate in terms of Section 25(3) of the Consumer Protection Act, if the said order has not been fully complied with. The complainants shall also be entitled to seek punishment of the appellants in terms of Section 27 of the Consumer Protection Act, on account of the appellants having failed to, omit to comply with its order. An offence punishable under Section 27 of the Consumer Protection Act, is committed as soon as there is a failure or omission to comply with the order passed by a consumer forum. A reference this regard can be made to the decision rendered by a Three-Member Bench of this Commission in EA/80/2016 Rajnish Kumar Rohtagi & Anr. Vs. M/s. Unitech Ltd. & Anr. & whereby the larger Bench interalia held as under: connected matters (1) A company, or a partnership firm, which fails or omits to comply with any order made by a District Forum, State Commission or National Commission, as the case may be, will be liable to the penalty prescribed in Section 27 of the Consumer Protection Act. (2) The date on which the order is passed by the District Forum, State Commission or the National Commission, as the case may be shall be deemed to be the date on which the offence under Section 27 of the C.P. Act is committed. The said offence will be deemed to continue till the order passed by the District Forum, the State Commission or the National Commission is complied in all respects.

5. For the reasons stated hereinabove the appeals are allowed and the order of the State Commission to the extent of penalty of Rs 50,000/- for dishonour of each cheque was imposed upon the appellants is set aside. It is made clear that the complainant shall be entitled to proceed against the appellants under Section 27 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 if the appellants had failed or omitted to comply with the order of the State Commission. The complainants shall also be entitled to seek enforcement of the compromise which they had entered into with the appellants, through the process of the State Commission. The parties shall appear before the State Commission on the dates already fixed in the execution proceedings. They shall also be entitled to proceed u/s 25(3) of the C.P. Act, if the compromise has still not been honoured. Since the order imposing penalty of Rs.50,000/- for dishonour of cheque has been set aside the second order of withholding the amount of penalty from out of the amount received through attachment of the bank account of the appellants is also set aside. The appeals stand disposed of. ......................J V.K. JAIN PRESIDING MEMBER