M A BHIMJI Vs. PAUL COMPAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal petition has been filed by the appellant Shri M.A. Bhimji now (Deceased) Through LRs, against the order dated 8.11.2012 of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Panaji, Goa, (in short 'the State Commission') passed in Complaint No.01/2002.

(2.) Brief facts relevant for disposal of the present first appeal are that the respondent Nos.1 and 2/original complainants booked a flat with opposite party No.1/respondent No.3 herein. Aggrieved with non-delivery of possession respondent No.1 and 2/complainants filed a consumer complaint before the State Commission alleging deficiency in service against the respondent No.3, who was the opposite party No.1 before the State Commission as well as against the opposite party No.2/appellant herein who was assigned the completion of the remaining work by the opposite party No.1/respondent No.3. The consideration amount was paid to the opposite party No.1/respondent No.3. Opposite party no.1 then entered into an agreement with opposite party No.2/appellant herein for completion of the project. The appellant demanded some more amounts from the complainants, which were not paid by the complainants as they had already paid the total amount to opposite party No.1/respondent No.3. Hence the complaint was filed by the complainants. The State Commission vide its order dated 16.09.2005 allowed the complaint and directed both the opposite parties to refund an amount of Rs.6.4 lakhs along with interest @15% p.a. jointly and severally. The appeal was preferred by the appellant before this Commission being FA No.482 of 2005. This Commission allowed the appeal of the present appellant and set aside the order of the State Commission dated 16.09.2005 qua the appellant, but upheld the same qua the other opposite party i.e. opposite party No.1/respondent No.3. The matter was remanded to the State Commission for deciding the question as to whether the present appellant was also liable to pay the awarded amount to the complainant.

(3.) The State Commission vide its order dated 08.11.2012 again considered the issue as per the direction given by this Commission. However, the State Commission confirmed its earlier order dated 16.09.2005. Hence the present appeal.