DELTA DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. Vs. NEETA SARKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant was the opposite party. Sagar Ch. Sarkar-complainant, father of the respondent entered into an agreement dated 10-4-1997 with the appellant/opposite party where under the cost of flat purchased by Shri Sarkar was fixed at Rs. 2,60,000/-. Appellant despite receipt of this amount did not handover possession of the flat. Alleging deficiency in service, complaint was filed against it before the State Commission. Though appearance through counsel was put by the appellant on 17-4-2003 but written version was not filed till 26-3-2004. State Commission allowed the complaint with direction to the appellant to refund the aforesaid amount of Rs. 2,56,000/- with prevailing bank rate of interest from date of deposit(s) till payment by the order dated 14-5-2004 under appeal.

(2.) In short, the submission advanced by Shri R.K. Pattanaik for appellant was that as may be seen from the cause title of complaint, the appellant-company was sued through Padmalav Sahoo, director. There are other managing directors/ directors of the company and Padmalav Sahoo is liable to pay the portion of his share only of the awarded amount and order under appeal, thus, needs to be modified to that extent. Submission is, however, without any merit. Inter se liability for payment of awarded amount between the managing directors/ directors of the appellant-company cannot be gone into in this appeal. Receipt of amount of Rs. 2,56.000/- as also non-handing over of possession of flat to the respondent are not disputed by the appellant. There is no infirmity in the order under appeal calling for interference under Section 21(a)(if) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. Appeal is, therefore, dismissed. Appeal dismissed.