OM GANESH CONSTRUCTIONS Vs. VIJAY VASUDEO KOTAVADEKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition filed under sec. 21(b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (in short, "the Act") assails the order dtd. 30/11/2011 of the Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Mumbai (in short, "the State Commission") in First Appeal no. A/08/21617, partly allowing the appeal against the order of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Pune (in short, "the District Forum") in Consumer Complaint no. PDF/7/20007 decided on 24/11/2008, deleting the directions to award compensation at Rs.3000.00 per month with effect from 1/2/2005 till the date of actual delivery of possession of the flat in question to respondent no.1.

(2.) The facts, in brief, as stated by the petitioner, are that respondent no.1 was in occupation of a room measuring 112.50 sq ft on the ground floor of House no. 206, Shukrawar Peth, Pune " 411 002. The house was owned by Mr Achalchand Valchand Jain, proprietor of M/s Achal and Associates. A Development Agreement between M/s Achal and Associates and M/s Mayur Associates was signed on 13/8/1993 and on 18/8/1993. Subsequently, M/s Mayur Associates assigned its development rights in favour of the present petitioner through a registered agreement dtd. 26/6/2001. Under this agreement the petitioner was required to obtain modifications of the sanctioned plan within three months of the date of the agreement and respondent no .1 was to be put in possession of the flat no.6A, 3rd floor of the building at 206, Shukrawar Peth, Pune, admeasuring 325 sq ft for a consideration of Rs.1,25,000.00. It was agreed that in the event of delay on the part of the petitioner to hand over the flat no. 6A, the defaulting party would be entitled to Rs.3000.00 per month as compensation from the other party. In the interim an alternative accommodation as mentioned in the agreement was to be provided to respondent no.1. Accordingly, respondent no.1 handed over the premises to the petitioner and was provided an alternative accommodation.

(3.) The petitioner states that respondent no.1 filed a complaint before the District Forum, Pune seeking possession of flat number 6A and compensation for the delay. The District Forum vide its order dtd. 24/11/2008 in CC no. PDF/7/2007 allowed the complaint and directed the petitioner to hand over the possession of the flat no.6A along with compensation of Rs.3000.00 per month with effect from 1/2/2005 till the delivery of the possession and also directed respondent no.1 to pay Rs.1,25,000.00 towards the cost of the flat to the petitioner.