M GOPALKRISHNAN Vs. COONOOR CONSUMER PROTECTION COUNCIL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Original Complaint No. 88 /1996 has been filed by 34 complainants against the opposite parties mentioned in the complaint alleging deficiency in service.

(2.) Very briefly the facts of the case are that it is alleged that in order to provide shelter to some of the employees working in Hindustan Photo Films, a scheme was published/displayed on the Notice Board of the Company, in response to which they made initial contribution of Rs. 5,000 each and also paid different amounts after obtaining loan from the employer, yet when the house were not being given to the complainants, this complaint was filed seeking following reliefs:

(3.) Six complainants along with Venkateshwara Housing Society filed a complaint before the State Commission alleging deficiency in service on the part of the respondents. Basis of the complaint were same as referred to in the complaint. The State Commission after hearing the parties, passed the order. Operative part of which reads as follows: