ASHAPURNA BUILDCON LTD Vs. OM PRAKASH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present Revision Petition has been filed by the Petitioner against order dated 30.09.2020 passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Rajasthan (for short "State Commission") in First Appeal No. 1304/2019.

(2.) Case of the Ccomplainant/Respondent is that he entered into an agreement dated 05.03.15 with the Opposite Party/Petitioner for construction on Plot No. 308 under the scheme "Ashapurna Nano Grand Project" for Rs.14,14,577/-. The Opposite Party gave a proposal for construction of Residential House in village Kharda Randhir, Shikargarh, Jodhpur at Khasra No. 19, 19/1, 19/2 and 19/3 and 31, 30/3, 30/4 and 30/7. The Complainant accepted the proposal for which the agreement was made on 05.03.2015. According to the agreement the construction area was 735 sq. feet on total area of Plot No. 308 of 111.11 sq. yards.

(3.) The booking was done on 18.03.2015 and booking amount of Rs.11,000/- was deposited through Receipt No. 1524 at the same time and later Rs.3,10,000/- was paid on 13.04.2015. Further, Rs.1,50,000/- was paid on 17.04.2015 and Rs.8,00,000/- was paid on 20.04.2015 through cheque by the Respondent. Total amount of Rs.12,71,000/- was paid by the Respondent and the balance payment of Rs.1,43,577 was assured to be paid at the time of delivery of possession as per the terms and conditions of the Agreement. On inspection by the Respondent's Civil Engineer, it was found that material used in the building, bathroom, furnishing, electric work etc. was of substandard quality. The Respondent, vide letter dated 26.09.2015, informed the Petitioner about the same. Instead of correcting the deficiencies, the Petitioner, vide letter dated 13.10.2015, cancelled the allotment on the ground of non-payment of balance amount. The Residential House No.308 was also sold to a third party Shri Mohan Singh Bhati. Aggrieved by the Opposite Party/Petitioner, the Complainant/ Respondent filed Consumer Complaint No.948 of 2015 before the District Forum for the alleged deficient service with the following prayer: