PRESENT

                   Complainant Absent.       

                   Oppoent  Absent.                     

                                       ORDER

                  (Per- Mr. S. D. MADAKE, Hon’ble President)

1.                 The complainant is an advocate by profession since 2007.  He was expecting  a visit of  his guests from Holland in  Aug,2011 arranged for a meeting of  families  in furtherance of their near future  plans for marriage.

2.                The complainant  entered into agreement for booking flat for a period between 16.8.2011 to 27.8.2011 on payment of Rs. 45,000/-.  An amount of Rs. 23,000/- was paid by cheque towards part payment as per agreement and Rs.22,000/- were to be paid at the time of leaving rooms.

3.                According to complainant Mr. Singh claiming to be a security guard refused to allow either of them to enter the gate of building and threatened to assault them.

4.                The complainant alleged that opp. No. 1 through representatives 2 to 5 never intended to let out the said apartment and their intention was to deceive complainant.

5.                The complainant prayed for direction to opposite parties to pay Rs.97,181/- ( Ninety seven thousand one hundred eighty one only) compensation of Rs. 2,00,000/- ( Two lacs only ) and cost Rs. 25,000/- ( Twenty five thousand only) to him.

6.                The complaint was filed on 9.2.2012.  The opponent No. 4 filed written statement and resisted allegations made in complaint.  It is submitted that complainant  failed to disclose about the nationality of foreign nationals, there was no option but to cancel the booking.  It is alleged that  booking was cancelled and an amount of Rs.18,400/- was paid to complainant as per agreement.

7.                The opp. No. 6 filed written statement on 13.4.2012 and denied allegations made in complaint.  It is stated that opp. No. 6 or their security staff were neither parties to the contract between complainant and other opponents.

8.                The opponent No. 6 stated that , flat was given to opp. No. 1 on leave and license  on certain conditions.  The opp. No. 1 to 5 and complainant have no right to commit breach of  terms of leave and license agreement between  opp. No. 1 and opp. No. 6.

9.                The opp. No. 6 stated that on 16.8.2011 one person claiming to be an advocate was trying to forcible entry in the building on the ground that he booked one flat as service  apartment on daily basis.  It is stated that , said person was not allowed as per rules of the society.  It is prayed that complaint be dismissed.

10.              We have perused all documents and pleadings.  Admittedly the flat was booked for a period between 16.8.2011 to 27.8.2011 for guests of complainant  Admittedly complainant and his guests were not allowed to stay in said flat.

11.              Admittedly complainant paid Rs. 23,000/- for booking.  His booking was cancelled on the ground of non-disclosure of nationality of foreign nationals.  The record  shows an amount of Rs. 18,400/- was refunded to complainant.

12.              The claim is made for mental agony and expenses incurred for alternate arrangement.  Admittedly opp. No. 6 was not party to booking and steps are taken by representatives in discharge of duties. 

13.              The roznama dated 26.3.2013 shows parties have amicably settled the matter.   The roznama dated 10.4.2013 shows that both  sides filed amicable settlement terms on record.  On 10.7.2013 roznama shows consent terms are filed, but the same is not on record.

14.              Considering the facts of the case and absence of parties , we hold that, both parties are not interested to proceed with case.  Hence we pass the following order.

                                                O R D E R

1.                RBT Complaint No. 46/2012 is  dismissed. 

2.                No order as to cost. 

3.                Copy of this order be sent to both parties.