ORDER P.S. Rana (R), President - Present revision filed under section 17 of Consumer Protection Act 1986 by executor namely Kanta Devi. Executor is aggrieved against the order dated 13.07.2016 passed by District Executing Forum in execution application No. 62 of 2014 title Smt. Kanta Devi v. Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Limited & Another , wherein learned Executing Forum dismissed execution application filed by revisionist. Brief facts of Case: 2. Learned District Forum in consumer complaint No. 46 of 2010 decided on dated 13.11.2013 ordered that opposite parties No. 1 & 2 i.e. Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company would pay Rs. 40887/- (Forty thousand eight hundred eighty seven) to the complainant within thirty days from the receipt of copy of order failing which opposite parties No. 1 & 2 would pay interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of complaint till realization. Learned District Forum further ordered that opposite parties would pay damages to the tune of Rs. 5000/- (Five thousand) to the complainant and learned District Forum further ordered that opposite parties would pay litigation costs to the tune of Rs. 1500/- (One thousand five hundred) to the complainant. Learned District Forum further ordered that complainant would submit claim to the opposite parties regarding PA cover claim of owner-cum-driver within thirty days from the date of receipt of copy of order and thereafter within next two months opposite parties would decide PA claim of owner-cum-driver. 3. Thereafter executor namely Kanta Devi filed execution application No. 62 of 2014 before learned District Executing Forum pleaded therein that opposite parties did not comply the order of learned District Forum dated 13.11.2013 relating to PA cover of owner-cum-driver. 4. Learned Executing Forum dismissed the execution application No. 62 of 2014 filed by executor on dated 13.07.2016. Feeling aggrieved against order dated 13.07.2016 passed by Learned Executing Forum present revision petition filed by Smt. Kanta Devi before State Commission. 5. We have heard learned advocates appearing on behalf of parties and we have also perused entire record carefully. 6. Following points arises for determination in present revision petition. 1. Whether revisionist namely Smt. Kanta Devi did not file execution application within limitation as mentioned under regulation No. 14 of Consumer Protection Regulation 2005. 2. Final order. Findings upon point No. 1 with reasons: 7. 6. Following points arises for determination in present revision petition. 1. Whether revisionist namely Smt. Kanta Devi did not file execution application within limitation as mentioned under regulation No. 14 of Consumer Protection Regulation 2005. 2. Final order. Findings upon point No. 1 with reasons: 7. Submission of learned advocate appearing on behalf of revisionist that learned executing forum has committed illegality by way of dismissing the execution application filed by executor and on this ground revision petition be allowed is decided accordingly. It is proved on record that learned District Forum in consumer complaint No. 46 of 2010 decided on dated 13.11.2013 ordered that opposite parties No. 1 & 2 i.e. Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company would submit claim to the opposite parties regarding PA cover claim of owner-cum-driver within thirty days from the date of receipt of copy of order and thereafter within next two months opposite parties would decide the PA claim of owner-cum-driver. 8. It is proved on record that copy of order was dispatched to revisionist/executor on dated 17.12.2013. As per regulation 14 of Consumer Protection Regulations 2005 period of limitation for filing any application for which no period of limitation has been specified in the act would be thirty days from the date of cause of action or from the date of knowledge. Regulation 14 of Consumer Protection Regulations 2005 is quoted below in toto: 14. Limitation - (1 ) Subject to the provisions of sections 15, 19 and 24A, the period of limitation in the following matters shall be as follows:- (i) Revision Petition shall be filed within 90 days from the date of the order or the date of receipt of the order as the case may be. (ii) Application for setting aside the ex-parte order under section 22A or dismissal of the complaint in default shall be maintainable if filed within thirty days from the date of the order or date of receipt of the order, as the case may be. (iii) An application for review under sub-section (2) of section 22 shall be filed to the National Commission within 30 days from the date of the order or receipt of the order, as the case may be. (iii) An application for review under sub-section (2) of section 22 shall be filed to the National Commission within 30 days from the date of the order or receipt of the order, as the case may be. (iv) The period of limitation for filing any application for which no period of limitation has been specified in the Act the rules of these regulations shall be thirty days from the date of the cause of action or the date of knowledge. (2) Subject to the provisions of the Act the Consumer Forum may condone the delay in filing an application or a petition referred to in sub-regulation (1) if valid and sufficient reasons to its satisfaction are given. 9. Admittedly no period of limitation is prescribed for filing execution of order under Consumer Protection Act 1986. It is held Regulation 14 of Consumer Protection Regulations 2005 would apply to the present execution application. In execution application executor has not mentioned the date of cause of action or date of knowledge. No condonation application filed by revisionist as per regulation No. 14(2) of Consumer Protection Regulation 2005. Consumer Protection Regulation 2005 came into operation w.e.f. 31.05.2005 vide notification No. G.S.R 342 E dated 31.05.2005 published in the Gazette of India. Consumer Protection Act 1986 is special law. It is well settled law that when there is conflict between general law and special law then special law always prevails. In view of above stated facts point No. 1 is decided in affirmative. Point No. 2: Final Order 10. In view of findings upon point No. 1 revision petition is dismissed. It is held that execution application was barred by limitation as per regulation 14 (2) of Consumer Protection Regulations 2005. Parties are left to bear their own litigation costs before State Commission. File of learned Executing Forum along-with certified copy of order be sent back forthwith and file of State Commission be consigned to record room after due completion forthwith. Certified copy of order be transmitted to parties forthwith strictly as per rules. Revision petition is disposed of. Pending application(s) if any also disposed of.