M/S. ANSAL HOUSING & CONSTRUCTION LTD. Vs. LALIT KUMAR VERMA 1473, INDIRA NAGAR, P.O. NEW FOREST DEHRADUN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition has been filed by the petitioner against the order dated 15.09.2008 passed by the Uttarakhand State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Dehradun (in short, 'the State Commission') in Appeal No. 55 of 2006 - Ansal Housing and Construction Ltd. v. Lalit Kumar by which, while accepting appeal partly, order of District Forum allowing complaint was upheld, but compensation was quashed.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that Complainant/respondent applied for allotment of one bedroom flat in Neel Padam Apartment, Vaishali, Ghaziabad scheme floated by OP/petitioner and complainant was allotted flat E-703 measuring 790 sq. ft. @ Rs. 425/- per sq. mt. It was further submitted that payment was to be made as per payment schedule plan of the OP and complainant paid 10 instalments out of total 11 instalments and last instalment was to be paid at the time of possession of flat. It was further submitted that complainant deposited Rs. 15,000/- with OP which was credited in others account and after several reminders OP vide letter dated 19.1.2000 intimated that now this amount stands deposited in complainant's account. It was further submitted that OP raised illegal additional demand of Rs. 1,62,459.31 and delayed handing over possession of flat by six years. Alleging deficiency on the part of OP, complainant filed complaint before District forum. OP resisted complaint and submitted that District Forum had no territorial jurisdiction. It was further submitted that complainant was liable to pay additional amount as claimed as per terms and conditions of printed allotment letter as well previous intimation to the complainant and prayed for dismissal of complaint. Learned District forum after hearing both the parties allowed complaint and directed OP to handover possession of flat on receipt of Rs. 37,486/- and further directed OP to pay Rs. 10,000/- towards mental agony and Rs. 3,000/- towards cost of litigation. Appeal filed by OP was partly allowed by learned State Commission vide impugned order and order awarding compensation of Rs. 10,000/- passed by learned District Forum was set aside and rest of the order was upheld against which, this revision petition has been filed.

(3.) Heard learned counsel for the parties finally at admission stage and perused record.