RAJ KISHORE Vs. M/S. TDI INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two appeals have been filed under section 21(a)(ii) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, against the impugned orders both dated 16.02.2016, passed by the Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, (hereinafter referred to as "the State Commission") in Consumer Complaints No. 1010/2015 and 84/2016, vide which, the said complaints were ordered to be dismissed on the issue of pecuniary jurisdiction, with liberty to file fresh complaints before the District Forum.

(2.) The facts are almost identical in both the cases. The complainants had booked flats in the project Tuscan Floors, Tuscan City, Kundli, Sonepat launched by the opposite party (OP) builder and the sale price in each case was mentioned as Rs. 25,44,426/-. The complainant filed the consumer complaint in question, alleging that the excess amount of Rs. 8,06,300.00 charged by the OP builder should be refunded to them along with interest @ 21% per annum, in addition to compensation in delay in the delivery of possession etc. It was also stated that the OP builder should take steps for registration of the conveyance deed in favour of the complainants. Vide impugned order passed by the State Commission, the said Commission dismissed the complaints, saying that since the relief claimed was less than Rs. 20 lakhs, the complaints should have been filed before the concerned District Forum. Being aggrieved against this order, the appellants are before this Commission by way of the present appeals.

(3.) It has been contended in the grounds of appeal that the State Commission had taken an erroneous view in dismissing the said complaints, because one of the reliefs sought by the complainants was for the registration of the conveyance deed. Since the price of the flat is more than Rs. 20 lakhs, the consumer complaints were within the pecuniary jurisdiction of the State Commission.