NCDRC

NCDRC

FA/2140/2019

SAHARA PRIME CITY LIMITED & 2 ORS. - Complainant(s)

Versus

SURAJ PRASAD MEENA & ANR. - Opp.Party(s)

M/S. ATHENA LEGAL

06 Oct 2022

ORDER

NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
NEW DELHI
 
FIRST APPEAL NO. 2140 OF 2019
 
(Against the Order dated 02/04/2019 in Complaint No. 71/2018 of the State Commission Rajasthan)
1. SAHARA PRIME CITY LIMITED & 2 ORS.
THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, SAHAR INDIA CENTRE2, KAPOORTHALA COMPLEX ALIGANJ
LUCKNOW
UP
2. SAHARA PRIME CITY LIMITED
THROUGH ITS MANAGER NOTHE ZONE OFFICE AT SAHARA PRIME CITY LIMITED, JMD PACIFIC SQUARE FIRST FLORO NEAR-2, MILE STONE SECTOR 15 PART II, NH8
GURGAON
HARYANA 122001
3. SAHARA PRIME CITY LIMITED
THROUGH ITS AREA MANAGER SAHARA PRIME CITY LIMITED,
UDAIPUR
...........Appellant(s)
Versus 
1. SURAJ PRASAD MEENA & ANR.
S/O. SHRI CHHOTEY LAL MEENA R/O. B-277/98, ORCEDIA GREEN VAISHALI ESTATE GANDHIPATH WEST
JAIPUR RAJASTHAN
2. SANTOSH DEVI
W/O. SURAJ PRASAD MEENA B-277/98, ORCEDIA GREEN VAISHALI ESTATE GANDHIPATH WEST
JAIPUR
RAJASTHAN
...........Respondent(s)

BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. DINESH SINGH,PRESIDING MEMBER
 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KARUNA NAND BAJPAYEE,MEMBER

For the Appellant :
Ms. Neha Gupta, Advocate
For the Respondent :
Mr. Bhupinder Pareek, Advocate

Dated : 06 Oct 2022
ORDER

1.   This appeal has been filed under section 19 of The Consumer Protection Act, 1986 in challenge to the Order dated 02.04.2019 of the State Commission in complaint no. 71 of 2018.

2.   Heard the learned counsel for the appellants (the ‘builder co.’) and the learned counsel for the respondents (the ‘complainants’). Also perused the record, including inter alia the State Commission’s impugned Order dated 02.04.2019 and the memorandum of appeal.

3.   The matter pertains to a builder-buyer dispute.

On 13.11.2019, at the time of admission, the following Order was made by this Commission:

      Dated : 13.11.2019

ORDER

Heard learned counsel for the appellants – builder co.  Perused the material on record.

In the State Commission’s impugned Order dated 02.04.2019 the following was awarded to the complainant:

In view of the above, the complaint is allowed and the complainant is entitled to get Rs. 14,80,051/- alongwith 15% interest from the date of each deposit. The complainant is further entitled to get Rs. 2 lakhs as compensation for mental agony and Rs. 50,000/- as cost of proceedings which should be paid to the complainant within one month otherwise it will carry 9% interest from the date of the order.

     Learned counsel for the appellants – builder co. submits, on instructions, that the appellants - builder co. is ready and willing to refund the entire amount deposited by the complainants with interest @ 8% p.a. from the dates of respective deposits till its realisation and to pay cost of litigation of Rs. 50,000/- to the complainants within eight weeks from today.

If the entire amount deposited by the complainants is refunded with interest @ 8% p.a. from the dates of respective deposits till its realisation and cost of litigation of Rs. 50,000/- is paid to the complainants as per the afore submission, the operation of the impugned Order of the State Commission in so far as it relates to payment of interest over and above 8% p.a. and compensation shall remain stayed till the disposal of this appeal.

It is made clear that if the appellants – builder co. fails to comply with the afore submission within the stipulated period of eight weeks from today, the State Commission shall proceed for execution of its Order in its entirety as per the law.

Issue notice on the application for condonation of delay and on the memo of appeal to the respondents, subject to payment of Rs.15,000/- to the respondent no. 1 directly in his name by way of demand draft to cover travel and allied expenses within a period of four weeks.

The Registry may ensure that the notice is issued and despatched within a period of ten days.

List the matter for further hearing on 20.05.2020. 

‘Dasti’, in addition, to facilitate timely compliance. 

4.   In reference to the above-quoted Order of 13.11.2019, learned counsel for the builder co. submits, on instructions, that the builder co. has refunded the entire amount of Rs. 14,80,051/- deposited by the complainants with interest at the rate of 8% per annum from the respective dates of deposit till actual realisation and has also paid the cost of litigation of Rs. 50,000/-. Learned counsel also submits, on instructions, that the amount of Rs.15,000/- to defray travel and allied expenses has also been paid.

Learned counsel for the complainants confirms, on instructions.

5.   The only residual questions in this appeal are, one, regarding the rate of interest over and above 8% per annum on the amount of Rs. 14,80,051/- deposited by the complainants, and, two, regarding the lumpsum compensation of Rs. 2,00,000/-.

6.   Learned counsel for the builder co. submits, on instructions, that the builder co. is willing to pay interest at the rate of 10% per annum on the amount of Rs. 14,80,051/- deposited by the complainants and is also willing to pay lumpsum compensation of Rs. 2,00,000/-.

Learned counsel for the complainants submits, on instructions, that the afore terms are acceptable to the complainants, provided the compliance in its entirety is made within six weeks from today and in case of default the amount of Rs. 14,80,051/- deposited by the complainants may carry interest at the rate of 12% per annum in place of 10% per annum.

Learned counsel for the builder co. submits, on instructions, that the award as suggested herein will be complied with in its entirety within six weeks from today.

7.   In the wake of the above submissions, the appeal is disposed of with the following directions:

The award made by the State Commission is modified to the extent that the builder co. shall refund the amount of Rs. 14,80,051/- deposited by the complainants with interest at the rate of 10% per annum from the respective dates of deposit till actual realisation along with Rs. 2,00,000/- as lumpsum compensation and Rs. 50,000/- as cost of litigation.

The amount already paid in compliance of this Commission’s Order dated 13.11.2019 shall be adjusted therein.

The residual amount after adjustment shall be made good within six weeks from today, failing which the amount of Rs.14,80,051/-                                                                       deposited by the complainants shall carry interest at the rate of 12% per annum in place of 10% per annum.

8.   This Order has been made on consent. As such the decision in this case shall not be treated as a precedent.

9.   The Registry is requested to send a copy each of this Order to the parties in the appeal and to their learned counsel as well as to the State Commission immediately. The stenographer is also requested to upload this Order on the website of this Commission immediately.       

      ‘Dasti’, in addition, to both sides.

 
......................
DINESH SINGH
PRESIDING MEMBER
......................J
KARUNA NAND BAJPAYEE
MEMBER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.