M2K INFRASTRUCTURE PVT LTD Vs. PRAVEEN KUMAR YADAV

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision is directed against concurrent finding of two Fora bolow. District Forum have ordered refund of Rs.5,00,000 paid by the complainant with 9% interest besides awarding Rs. 30,000 for mental agony and Rs. 5,000 as cost of litigation. This order was challenged by the present petitioner before the State Commission. The State Commission dismissed the appeal.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has urged before us that the complainant did not choose plan and that initially complaint was filed for directions to complete construction, but, subsequently, the complainant sought refund of the amount. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, there is no deficiency on the part of the petitioner and the findings of the Fora below are required to be set aside. We do not find any merit whatsoever in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. Both the Fora below took note of the fact that the petitioner had collected a sum of Rs.3,00,000 on 22.12.2006 even before the licence was issued to the petitioner for the project and a sum of Rs.2,00,000 thereafter. The Fora below found that the amount was accepted in contravention of Section 7 of Haryana Development and Regulation of Urban Areas Act, 1975. Obviously, the petitioner could not have collected any amount from the complainant in the absence of any licence and as such, it is a clear case of deficiency on the part of the petitioner on account of which the complainant was entitled to refund of the amount paid by him with interest and compensation as also litigation expenses.

(3.) In view of the above, we do not find any merit in this case as we do not find any material irregularity, illegality or jurisdictional error in the orders of the Fora below. Accordingly, the revision is dismissed with no order as to cost.