STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION OF TELANGANA :
At HYDERABAD
FA 28 of 2015
Against
CC No. 588 of 2010
` District Consumer Forum -1, Hyderabad
Between :
Mr. M. Karthik Reddy,
S/o M. Devender Reddy,
H.No. 2-2-18/46, B-21, Mithila Enclave
204, D.D. Colony, Bagh Amberpet,
Hyderabad – 500 013,
Represented by his father and G.P.A. Holder
Mr. M. Devender Reddy, S/o late M.Papi Reddy,
Occ : Retired Govt.College Principal
H.No. 2-2-18/46, B-21, Mithila Enclave
204, D.D. Colony, Bagh Amberpet,
Hyderabad – 500 013 … Appellant/complainant
And
- M/s. Pragati Green Meadows and Resorts Ltd
Rep. by its Chairman G. Bala Koteswar Rao,
Off. Door No. 271/A,
Road No. 10, Opp. to Spicy Venue Restaurant),
Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad – 500 033.
- G. Bala Koteswara Rao,
Chairman : Pragati Green Meadows and Resorts Ltd
Off. Door No. 271/A,
Road No. 10, Opp. to Spicy Venue Restaurant),
Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad – 500 033.
- Smt. G.V. Kumari, W/o G. Bala koteswara Rao,
Finance Director : Off. Door No. 271/A,
Road No. 10, Opp. to Spicy Venue Restaurant),
Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad – 500 033.
- Sri G. Ajay Chandra, s/o G. Bala Koteswara Rao
Joint Managing Director : Pragati Green Meadows and Resorts Ltd
Off. Door No. 271/A,
Road No. 10, Opp. to Spicy Venue Restaurant),
Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad – 500 033. .. Respondents/OPs
Counsel for the Appellant : Sri K. Yadagiri Reddy
Counsel for the Respondents : Sri B. Siva Kesava Reddy
Coram :
Hon’ble Sri Justice M.S.K.Jaiswal ….. President
and
Hon’ble Sri K. Ramesh … Member
Tuesday, the Twenty Eighth Day of August
Two Thousand Eighteen
ORAL ORDER
***
01. This is an appeal is filed by the complainant against the order dated 30.12.2013 passed by the District Forum I, Hyderabad in CC No. 588 of 2010 to refund an amount of Rs.11,13,094/-with interest @ 18% pa from 17.03.2008 till the date of payment, to refund Rs.41,000/- collected for registration charges and also enhance the amounts in respect of costs.
02. The parties are being referred to as arrayed before the District Forum for the sake of convenience.
03. The brief facts of the complaint are that the complainant and his sister paid a total sum of Rs.11,44,500/- by 16.03.2008 to the opposite parties towards sale consideration of two plots @ Rs.9,25,000/- each vide Ex.A5 and A6 pass books and the complainant has to pay Rs.9,25,000/- towards the sale consideration of plot No. A-753 and sector A of 752. He also paid Rs.41,000/- towards registration charges. The Gram Panchayat, Medipally under letter dated 28.01.2013 informed him that there is no layout infavour of Pragathi Green Heights in Sector-A and such layout is formed illegally. There is no development in the plots. When he approached, the opposite parties failed to locate the plot registered and hand over possession of the same. On persuasion, the opposite parties though agreed to refund the entire amount paid by him, but, refunded only Rs.41,406/-. Hence the complaint to direct the opposite parties to refund the entire amount of Rs.11,03,094/- paid with interest @ 18% pa from 17.03.2008 till the date of realization, to award a sum of Rs.41,000/- towards registration charges and Rs.1,00,000/- for deficiency in service, to award Rs.25,000/- as punitive damages with costs of Rs.10,000/-.
04. The opposite parties, while admitting the purchase of two plots by the complainant and his sister for a total sale consideration of Rs.18,75,000/- and payment of Rs.11,54,500/-, contended that on the request of the father of the complainant they cancelled plot No. A-752 which is in the name of Smt. M. Akhila Reddy and refunded the amount of Rs.41,406/- after deducting registration charges of Rs.41,000/- and Rs. 1,47,094/- towards cancellation fee and travelling expenditure. Thus, there is no deficiency in service on their part and hence prayed to dismiss the complaint.
05. The complainant in support of his claim filed his evidence affidavit and got marked Ex. A-1 to A-19 and the opposite parties filed evidence affidavit and marked Ex. B-1 to B-11.
06. The District Forum, on the basis of the material available on record, came the conclusion that it cannot be decided in a summary manner and dismissed the complaint. Later, in the appeal in FA No. 309 of 2012 preferred by the complainant, this Commission remanded the matter back to the District Forum for fresh disposal and thereafter, the District Forum, on the merits of the case directed the opposite parties to refund an amount of Rs.11,13,094/- to the complainant with interest @ 12% pa from 17.03.2008 till the date of passing of the order, to pay Rs.41,000/- towards the registration charges besides compensation of Rs.10,000/- and costs of Rs.5,000/-.
07. Aggrieved by the said the order, the dis-satisfied complainant preferred this appeal, once again, mainly, to award interest till the date of payment @ 18% pa on the amount of Rs.11,13,094/- from 17.03.2008, instead of till the date of passing of the order, i.e., dt. 30.12.2014, while enhancing the amounts in respect of compensation and costs.
08. Heard the counsel for the appellant. Perused the record.
- The point that arises for consideration is whether the impugned order as passed by the District Forum suffers from any error or irregularity or whether it is liable to be set aside, modified or interfered with, in any manner? To what relief?
- There is no dispute that the appellant/complainant and his sister paid a total sum of Rs.11,44,500/- to the opposite parties towards sale consideration of two plots @ Rs.9,25,000/- each vide Ex.A5 and A6 pass books. There is also no dispute that the appellant/complainant paid Rs.41,000/- towards registration charges. There is also no dispute that the respondents/opposite parties refunded only an amount of Rs.41,406/- out of the total amount of Rs.11,44,500/- paid by him after deducting Rs.41,000/- towards registration charges and Rs.1,47,094/- towards cancellation fee and travelling expenditure.
- The District Forum opined that when there is no approved plan and when area/plots remain like a forest and there is no development of the land, there is no option to the appellant/ complainant except claiming refund of the amount paid by him and hence he is entitled to refund of the amount paid by him and the respondents/opposite parties are not liable to deduct the amount of Rs.1,42,094/- and Registration charges of Rs.41,000/- and awarded interest from 17.03.2008 till the date of passing of the order.
- Counsel for the appellant/complainant argued that the District Forum has granted interest from 17.03.2008 but not awarded interest till the date of realization from 17.03.2008 as prayed for . Despite many adjournments, there is no representation on behalf of the respondents. Perusal of the record shows that the District Forum has granted interest from 17.03.2008, i.e, the last date of payment till the date of passing of the order only and since the District Forum has awarded interest prior to the passing of the order and grant of interest subsequent to the order till the date of realization is nothing but just consequential order which should follow. After considering all the foregoing facts and circumstances and also having regard to the contentions raised on behalf of the appellant/complainant, the impugned order is liable to be modified to the extent that the appellant/complainant is entitled to recover the amount of Rs.11,13,094/- together with interest @ 12% from 17.03.2008 till the date of realization of the amount, instead of till the passing of the impugned order.
- In the result, the appeal is allowed in part and the order dated 30.12.2014 in CC 588 of 2010 on the file of the District Forum-1, Hyderabad is modified directing the respondents/opposite parties to pay interest @ 12% P.. from 17.03.2008 till the date of realization, while upholding the rest of the impugned order. There shall be no order as to costs in the appeal. Time for compliance four weeks.
PRESIDENT MEMBER
DATED : 28.08.2018.
