N.KANNADASAN, J. - (1.) Appellant is the complainant and the respondents are the opposite parties before the District Forum.
(2.) The above appeal is filed under Sec.27 (A) of the CP Act, as against the order dt.12.9.2007 in EP No.82/2006 in OP.No.75/2004.
(3.) Appellant / party in person contended that in pursuance of the order passed in OP No.75/2004 on 23.3.2006, the opposite parties have directed the complainant to take over the possession of the cottage at Kodaikanal, Dindigul District 02.05.06. But however on the very next day viz. on 3.5.2006, the complainant informed the opposite parties that only after visiting Kodaikanal, he would be in a position to report as to whether there is satisfactory compliance of the direction issued by the District Forum. According to the appellant, on the very next day, when he visited Kodaikanal, he found that several works were not completed and hence he was constrained to file EP.No.82/2006, which was dismissed, against which the present appeal is filed. The main grievance on the part of the appellant / complainant is that eventhough the District Forum has passed an order directing the opposite party to handover the possession of the cottage, after completion in all respects, free from any defects, the said direction was not complied with by the opposite parties and when an Execution Petition was filed, the same was dismissed without taking note of the grievances of the complainant.;