A H KAPADIA Vs. SHAH AND SEJPAL DEVELOPERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This complaint is placed before us for admission hearing.

(2.) The complainant is a flat purchaser and O. Ps. the builders. O. P. No.1 is builder and O. P. Nos.2 to 4 are its partners. The subject matter of the dispute is flat which the complainant claims to have agreed to purchase from the builders for total consideration of Rs.20 lakhs vide agreement dated 12.4.2000 being Annexure 'a' to the complaint. In Clause 3 of the agreement the total consideration of the flat has been mentioned as Rs.20 lakhs.

(3.) The complainant has certain grievance against the builder in respect of the said fact. The complaint has been filed on 23.2.2004 i. e. , after amended provision of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 , were brought into force, raising pecuniary limit of jurisdiction of the District Forum from Rs.5 lakhs to Rs.20 lakhs and that of State Commission from 20 lakhs to Rs.1 crore. In our numerous decisions following the decision of National Commission in the case of Shahab Co-op. Sugar Mills V/s. National Insurance Co. Ltd. and Others, 2003 2 CPJ 81, and in the case of Vijay Shankar V/s. Mandeep Singh and Others, 2003 2 CPJ 170 (NC), we have held that for the purpose of determination of valuation for the purpose of pecuniary limit, criteria is to take into consideration valuation of the subject matter of the complaint for the purpose of pecuniary jurisdiction. Further benefits claimed such as compensation and interest are not to be taken into consideration.