SUDARSHAN KUMAR Vs. MEERUT DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved by the findings and Order of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, U.P., Lucknow (for short, the State Commission), the Complainant ' Sudarshan Kumar filed the present Revision Petition No. 3191 of 2014 under Sec. 21(b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short, the Act). The Complaint filed by the Complainant ' Petitioner in District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (for short, the District Forum) was allowed and the Opposite Party / Respondent was directed to restore the allotment of the plot at the old rate without charging any interest and carry out development work on the plot of land after recovering the free hold charges from the Complainant and further to pay interest @ 12 % p.a. on the amount deposited by Complainant till handing over of possession alongwith Rs.7,000.00 as compensation for mental agony and cost of litigation.

(2.) Aggrieved by this Order dtd. 3/5/2010 of the District Forum, the Respondent / Opposite Party ' Meerut Development Authority filed an Appeal before the State Commission, which, vide its Order dtd. 7/5/2014, partially allowed the Appeal by modifying the Order of the District Forum and ordering the Opposite Party to issue notice to the Complainant for payment of the remaining amount at the rate payable on the date of allotment of the disputed plot of land. Subsequent to the above payment, the Opposite Party must handover the possession to the Complainant alongwith Rs.3,000.00 in total towards financial loss and cost of proceedings.

(3.) As the District Forum and the State Commission have comprehensively addressed the facts of the case, which led to filing of the Complaint and passing of the Orders, I do not find it relevant to reiterate the same.