MADHU RATHOUR Vs. SOUTH DELHI UNIVERSITY TEACHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Complainant/Appellant herein has filed this Appeal against the judgment and order dated 28.11.05 passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Delhi (in short, 'the State Commission') in Complaint Case No. C-186/1993 whereby the State Commission while partly allowing the complaint filed by the Appellant has directed the Respondent Housing Society to pay a compensation of Rs.25,000/- to the Respondent along with costs of Rs.10,000/-.

(2.) Appellant/Complainant was a member of the Respondent Cooperative Group Housing Society since 1984. Respondent Society issued a circular dated 07.05.84 offering Duplex Flat to its members for a consideration of Rs.1,30,000/- and the Appellant applied for the same. Vide circular dated 26.03.85, Respondent Society escalated the cost of the Duplex Flat from Rs.1,30,000/- to Rs.1,75,000/-. Thereafter, again Respondent Society escalated the cost of Duplex Flat to Rs.2,00,000/- and also introduced a category of M.S. flats for a consideration of Rs.2,80,000/-. Appellant requested the Respondent Society to switch over from Duplex Flat to M.S. Flat which request was acceded to by the Respondent. By letter dated 11.03.88, Respondent Society informed the Appellant that the amount due upto 6th installment of M.S. Flat was Rs.2,08,500/- while the Appellant had paid Rs.1,95,000/- only and demanded the balance amount of Rs.13,500/-. Appellant paid the said amount and M.S. Flat No.224 was allotted to her by the Respondent. Vide circular dated 16.02.88, Respondent Society escalated the price of M.S. Flat from Rs.2,80,000/- to Rs.3,25,000/- and the enhanced amount was paid by the Appellant to the Respondent. Appellant requested the Respondent Society to deliver the possession of the allotted Flat by writing various letters. On 24.08.90, Respondent Society issued expulsion notice from the primary membership of the Society to the Appellant if she failed to make payment of Rs.62,522.83 within a period of 30 days. Appellant, being aggrieved, filed the complaint No.186/93 before the State Commission on 12.12.93.

(3.) Since the Respondent Society did not file its written statement even after six months from the date of receipt of notice on 09.09.93, State Commission struck off the defence of the Respondent. Feeling aggrieved, Respondent filed R.P.No.481/94 before this Commission which was allowed reserving liberty to the Respondent to file its written statement before the State Commission.