Section 25's drafting gap on enforcing non-monetary orders allows interpretive remedies; Section 27A not available against first-appellate execution orders

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....SC held that Section 25, as post-2002 amended, contains a drafting lacuna concerning enforcement of non-monetary final orders; courts may employ interpretative tools to rectify ambiguity where literal construction yields absurdity or frustrates the Act's spirit. Revision petitions filed against orders in execution proceedings before the State Commission were treated as appeals against the District Forum's execution order, but such first-appellate orders do not attract Section 27A jurisdiction and are not maintainable before the National Commission. Consequently, no further remedy lies under the consumer appellate scheme against the State Commission's first-appellate order in execution proceedings; aggrieved parties remain at liberty to pursue appropriate remedies available under law. Appeal disposed.....