LALITA TRIPATHI Vs. RAVINDRA NATH VERMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition has been filed by the petitioners Smt. Lalita Tripathi and ors. against the order dated 21.4.2010 passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Jharkhand, (in short 'the State Commission') in FA No.723 of 2007.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that the father of respondents No.1,2 and 3 entered into a development agreement with respondent No.8 on 15.11.2000 for a multi-storeyed building on his land. As per the development agreement, the builder was to get 5 flats and the owners were to get three flats. It has been alleged in the complaint that respondent No.8 who was opposite party No.2 in the original complaint case sold these 5 flats to the five petitioners/complainants and received the following amounts from the petitioners as major part of the consideration.

(3.) As these petitioners did not get the possession of their flats, they filed consumer complaint before the District Forum being consumer complaint No.30 of 2005. The opposite party No.1 the landowner expired during the pendency of the complaint case and his three sons were substituted in his place who are respondent Nos.1,2 and 3 in the present revision petition. The opposite party No.2, the builder did not appear before the District Forum and was proceeded ex-parte. The respondents No.1,2 and 3 contested the complaint on the ground that they did not have any privity of contract with the components as they had not received any amount from them. They are also not party in the agreement to sell which was signed between the complainants and the builder. The District Forum in its order dated 27.9.2007, however, allowed the complaint and directed the opposite party No.1 and opposite party No.2 to jointly and severally to give the possession of the respective flats to the complainants and make payment of interest @12% per annum for the delayed possession, on their respective deposited amounts from the date of filing of the complaint till realization subject to complainants paying the remaining amount of consideration.