KUSUM ANJALI Vs. ANSAL HOUSING AND CONSTRUCTION LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Complainant as well as the Opposite Party before the State Commission have filed these appeals against the judgment and order dated 08.05.2007 passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Delhi (in short, 'the State Commission') in Complaint No.344/00 whereby the State Commission partly allowing the complaint has directed the Opposite Party, M/s. Ansal Housing and Construction Ltd. to allot any other plot, if still available, on payment of demanded amount and in case no plot was available then to refund the amount of Rs.5,18,402.19 with interest @ 12% p.a. from the date of filing of the complaint till the passing of the order.

(2.) On 18.04.1996, one Ayesha Mishra booked Plot No. B-B106 admeasruing 478 sq. yards with M/s. Ansal Housing and Construction Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "the Respondent") against the advance payment of Rs.80,000/-. She further paid Rs.12,172.50 to the Respondent on 14.05.96. The amount due against her as on 24.09.96 was Rs.1,33,085/-. On 26.09.96, Appellant/Complainant (hereinafter to be referred to as "the Appellant") purchased all the rights, title and interest from Ms. Ayesha Misra in the said plot after paying Rs.1,41,036/- to her. Appellant further paid Rs.1,33,085/- towards balance consideration, Rs.10,885.69 towards interest for delayed payment and Rs.11,950/- as transfer fee charges to the Respondent.

(3.) On 19.12.96, Respondent again raised a demand of Rs.90,000/- from the Appellant. Appellant vide letter dated 31.12.96 asked the Respondent for requisite documents showing their ownership on the plot, final lay out plan, allotment letter of the said site by the Greater Noida Authority in their favour etc. Despite repeated requests made by the Appellant, no such information was furnished by the Respondent. Subsequently, by letter dated 10.11.2000, Respondent asked the Appellant to pay the sum of Rs.3,60,412/- towards arrears of installment and interest by 20.11.2000 failing which the allotment of the plot shall stand cancelled. Appellant refused to pay the interest as the requisite information was not furnished by the Respondent and filed the complaint before the State Commission alleging negligence on the part of the Respondent.