BEFORE THE KARNATAKA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,
BENGALURU (ADDL. BENCH)
DATED THIS THE 12th DAY OF APRIL 2023
PRESENT
MR. RAVISHANKAR : JUDICIAL MEMBER
MRS. SUNITA CHANNABASAPPA BAGEWADI : MEMBER
APPEAL NO. 1129/2017
M/s Maxworth Realty India Limited, Head Office at No.22/1, Railway Parallel Road, Nehru Nagar, Bangalore 560 020, Rep. by Authorized Signatory. (By Sri B.C. Praveen) Appellants are same in both the appeals | ……Appellant/s |
V/s
Mr. B.S. Ravi, S/o Satyanarayan Reddy, Aged about 33 years, R/at No.2, 3rd Main, K.R.Garden, Murugeshpalya, Bangalore 560 017. (By Sri H.V. Ramachandra) | ..…Respondent/s |
ORDER
MR. RAVISHANKAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER
1. The appellants/Opposite Parties have preferred both these appeals being aggrieved by the Order dt.01.07.2016 passed in CC.No.1574/2015 on the file of 2nd Additional District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Bengaluru.
2. The brief facts of the complaints are hereunder;
It is the case of the complainant that enticing by the advertisement of the Opposite Party has approached to purchase three plots bearing No.34 measuring 30x40 feet for a sale consideration of Rs.12,00,000/-, Plot No.193 measuring 30x50 feet for a sale consideration of Rs.9,75,000/- and Plot No.194 measuring 30x40 feet for a sale consideration of Rs.7,80,000/- in the project of the Opposite Party namely “Max Orchid Phase-III”. The complainant has paid the booking amount in this regard. As per the terms and conditions of the booking forms and discussion, the Opposite Party supposed to execute the Sale Agreement in 20 days and also the complainant has to pay 30% of the total sale consideration. After a lapse of 20 days, the complainant has visited the Opposite Party to pay the remaining booking amount and execute the Sale Agreement as per the terms and conditions of the booking forms, but, the Opposite Party kept on postponing the same stating that the property is under approval etc., and not executed the Sale Agreement till today. Hence, the complaint.
3. After service of notice, the Opposite Party remained absent, hence, placed exparte. After trial, the District Commission allowed the complaint and directed the Opposite Party to refund the booking amount paid by the complainant with interest along with compensation and costs.
4. Aggrieved by the said Order, the appellant/ Opposite Party is in appeal. Further, as per the office note, we noticed that there is a delay of 277 days in filing the appeal. We noticed that the appellant had not filed any application under the provisions of Limitation Act to condone the delay in filing this appeal. Heard from both sides.
5. On perusal of the memorandum of appeal, certified copy of the order and documents produced before the District Commission, it is an admitted fact that the respondent has booked three plots bearing No.34 measuring 30x40 feet for a sale consideration of Rs.12,00,000/-, Plot No.193 measuring 30x50 feet for a sale consideration of Rs.9,75,000/- and Plot No.194 measuring 30x40 feet for a sale consideration of Rs.7,80,000/- in the project of the Opposite Party namely “Max Orchid Phase-III” by paying the booking amount. As per the terms and conditions of the booking form, the appellant has to execute the Sale Agreement in favour of the respondent by receiving 30% of the sale consideration from the respondent, but, till today the appellant has not executed the Sale Agreement in favour of the respondent which clearly goes to show that there is a deficiency in service on the part of the appellant. The District Commission after trial allowed the complaint and directed to refund the amount paid by the respondent with interest along with compensation and costs. We found that there is no illegality or irregularity in the Order passed by the District Commission. Apart from that we noticed that the appellant had placed exparte before the District Commission and not shown any reason that why he has not appeared and contested the matter in the memorandum of appeal. Further, there is a delay of 277 days in filing this appeal. Even the appellant has not cared to file an application to condone the delay at the time of filing this appeal. The delay was not explained. Hence, the appeal fails. Hence, the following;
ORDER
The Appeal is dismissed.
The amount in deposit shall be transmitted to the District Commission for disbursement of the same to the complainant/s.
Forward free copies to both parties.
Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
KCS*
