LESLIE JOE PAUL Vs. EMAAR MGF LAND LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In terms of section 21 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, this Commission has pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain a consumer complaint where the value of goods or services as the case may be and the compensation if any claimed by the complainant exceeds Rs.1 crore. As held by a three-Members Bench of this Commission in Ambrish Kumar Shukla & Ors. Vs. Ferrous Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. decided on 07.10.2016, the value of the services in such case means the sale consideration agreed between the parties.

(2.) This Commission has not awarded compensation in the form of interest at a rate higher than 12% per annum in such matters while simultaneously directing delivery of possession of the house to the flat buyer.

(3.) If the agreed sale consideration and compensation in the form of interest @ 12% per annum computed on the amount paid by the complainant to the opposite party calculated @ 12% per annum from the committed date of delivery till the complaint was instituted are added, the aggregate does not come to Rs. 1 crore, therefore, this Commission does not have pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain the complaints. The opposite party has in fact already raised a preliminary objection that this Commission does not have requisite jurisdiction to entertain these complaints. These complaints therefore, ought to have been instituted before the concerned State Commission.