M RAMANUJAM Vs. CHAIRMAN TAMIL NADU HOUSING BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this order the above titled 16 appeals are dealt with. Out of the said 16 appeals 3 appeals were filed against a common order passed in 4 O. Ps. namely O. P.73/95, 76/95, 79/95 and 82/95.3 out of 4 complainants whose O. Ps. have been dismissed have filed A. P. Nos.1019, 1020, and 1021/96. Remaining 13 appeals have been filed out of another common order passed in 13 O. Ps. namely O. P. Nos.131/95 to 137/95 and 147/95,148/95, 156/95, 186/95, 203/95 and 204/95. Hereto the appellants are the complainants whose O. Ps have been dismissed.

(2.) During the course of the arguments before us it was stated by both sides that out of the 16 appeals, in 15 appeals exactly common questions arise and in one appeal i. e. , A. P.1019/ 95 filed against an order in O. P. No.73/95, there is little difference in that whereas in the said 15 appeals one of the prayers was for execution of the Sale Deed by the opposite party, in the said one appeal the Sale Deed has already been executed.

(3.) The District Forum on consideration of the pleadings in the complaints and the written versions Held that in all the matters the complainants have questioned the price fixed for the building and the land, and they cannot do because such a question cannot be decided under the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act. On this finding the District Forum Held that there is no merit in all the complaints and, therefore, it dismissed them.