MANOJ SHARMA Vs. ZILA PARISHAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against order dated 20th July, 1991 passed by the District Forum, Jehanabad in Complaint Case No.50 of 91 in which the appellant was the complainant (hereinafter called the complainant) and respondent was the opposite party (hereinafter called the opposite party ).

(2.) The relevant facts for the disposal of this appeal may be briefly stated. The opposite party invited offers for settlement of shops of various dimensions through bid with the condition that Rs.200/- was to be deposited for taking part in bid and that the minimum official Salami for the shop was. Rs.60,000/-and the monthly rental for a shop having a carpet area of 20' x 20' was Rs.1,000/- and that the shop will be let out to the highest bider provided he deposited the 10% of the bid amount immediately and deposited the remaining amount within 15 days (vide Annexure-I to the Memo of Appeal ). The complainant deposit d Rs.200/- for taking part in the bid held on 25.1.91 and he offered the highest bid of Rs.76,000/- and as per the terms and conditions he deposited Rs.7,600/- as ten percent of that amount. The complainant did not deposit the remaining amount as he learnt subsequently that demand of Salami was contrary to the provisions of law. The O. P. asked the complainant to deposit the remaining amount within three days, through a notice dated 4th March, 1991 (Annexure to the Memo of appeal) and informing the complainant that if he will not deposit the said amount within three days, the settlement made in his favour would be cancelled. The complainant therefore filed this case before the District Forum. As the complainant did not deposit the amount, the O. P. canceled the settlement of that shop with the complainant. The complainant, therefore, sought for before the District Forum the relief that the demand of Salami by the opposite party be declared illegal and the advance deposited by the complainant be refunded to him with interest of @ 18% per annum thereon after deducting Rs.1,000/-as the monthly rental of the shop and for direction to the opposite party to deliver the shop to the complainant at the monthly rent of Rs.1,000/-.

(3.) The District Forum found that the relief sought by the complainant are not covered by Sec.14 of the Consumer Protection Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'act') and, therefore, the complainant were not entitled to those reliefs. However, the District Forum directed the opposite party to refund Rs.7,600/-, the amount deposited by the complainant without further loss of time. Against this order the present appeal has been filed.