ANSAL LOTUS MELANGE PROJECTS (P) LTD. Vs. ABHILASH KUKANA & ANR. 458, LILA CHOWK PURANI ABADI, SRIGANGA NAGAR RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By all these ten Revision Petitions, a Real Estate Developer, namely, M/s Ansal Lotus Melange Projects (P) Ltd., the sole Opposite Party in the Complaints, calls in question the correctness and legality of two sets of orders dated 02.06.2015 and 16.09.2015, passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, U.T. Chandigarh (for short "the State Commission") in First Appeals No. 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 189, 190, 191, 192 and 193 of 2015. By the impugned orders, the State Commission has affirmed different orders dated 16.04.2015, 23.04.2015, 17.04.2015, 24.04.2015, 27.04.2015, and 29.05.2015, passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forums I and II, UT Chandigarh (for short "the District Forums" in Complaint Cases No. 715/2013, 753/2013, 785/2013, 755/2013, 754/2013, 590/2013, 589/2014, 537/2013, 538/2013 and 103/2014. By the said orders, while accepting the Complaints filed by the Respondents herein, alleging unfair trade practice and deficiency in service on the part of the Petitioner herein in charging excess amounts for the super area, the District Forums had directed the Petitioner to recalculate the super area and refund the excess amount charged from the Complainants. The District Forums had also awarded in favour of the Complainants different amounts of compensation on account of mental agony and harassment caused to them, along with litigation expenses, quantified at Rs. 10,000/- in each of the Complaints.

(2.) Having heard learned Counsel for the parties at some length and perused the pleadings and the orders passed by the Fora below, in our view, the short question falling for consideration, in all these cases, relates to the determination of "Super Area" in respect of each of the subject flats, as defined in Clause-2 of the allotment letter, which reads as follows:

(3.) In short, the controversy is whether the "Super Area", as calculated by the Petitioner, for which the Complainants have been charged before putting them in possession of the flats allotted to them, is as per the formula laid down in the afore-extracted Clause.