AKHILESH KUMAR VERMA Vs. SKIPPER BUILDERS PVT LD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Mr. Akhilesh Kumar Verma who was the complainant before the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi has filed this appeal challenging the orders dated 13th October, 1993 and 19th January, 1994 passed by the State Commission. Briefly the facts are that the complainant had filed a complaint before the State Commission against M/s. Skipper Builders Pvt. Ltd. and Sardar Tejwant Singh, Director of the 1st opposite party. He averred that the opposite parties had advertised extensively regarding sale of apartments in their complex named Symphony Apartments in the Times of India dated May 30,1989. It was especially mentioned in the advertisement that the apartments would be ready for possession by end of 1991 and there would be no escalation in the cost of the flats. The complainant obtained the brochure and applied for one apartment on 9.6.89 and depositing Rs. 25,000/ - as earnest money on 10th June, 1989. Later on he further deposited a further amount of Rs. 1,57,125.00 as detailed below:

(2.) IT was further pleaded that besides the assurance given in the advertisement, brochure and pamphlets about handing over the possession of the apartment by end of 1991, the apartments have not been even completed so far. The" complainant has been suffering mental agony for the last more than one -an -half years as his total savings and borrowed money had been locked up with the opposite parties. It is also averred that the complainant approached the Housing Development Financial Corporation (H.D.F.C.) for the balance amount and paid Rs. 3,600/ - to them as administrative expenses for sanctioning the loan, which has gone all in vain. In such circumstances, the complainant prayed that the opposite parties may be directed to refund a sum of Rs. 1,72,125/ - with interest. He has also claimed Rs. 30,000/ - as damages on account of mental torture and Rs. 2,500/ - p.m. on account of loss of rent.

(3.) TO support his case the complainant produced the advertisement dated 30th May, 1989, brochure issued by the opposite parties, receipts regarding payment, letters written by him to the opposite parties. The State Commission held that from the documents produced by the complainant, his allegations stood proved. Accordingly, the State Commission ordered the respondent to refund the sum of Rs. 1,72,125/ -with interest at the rate of 18% per annum from 1st November, 1991 till the date of payment within a period of three months. (It may be mentioned here that in the operative part, the figure mentioned by the State Commission is Rs. 1,82,125/ -. In the original order the date of advertisement was mentioned as 13th May, 1989 and while narrating the plea of the Complainant the State Commission had mentioned that the Complainant had paid to the opposite parties directly a sum of Rs. 1,82,125/ -. The complainant filed an application for rectification of the errors. According to him the date of advertisement was May 30,1989, while the total deposits made by him amounted to Rs. l,72,125/ -.He prayed that interest may be allowed from the dates of deposits. Vide order dated 19th January, 1994, the State Commission rectified the mistakes in regard to the date of advertisement and the total amount deposited by the complainant. However, it refused to order that the interest should be payable from the dates on which the amounts were deposited since it has no power of review. The application was disposed of accordingly. As noticed above, the complainant has filed this appeal challenging both the orders.