LALITA LANGER Vs. SANDEEP CHILLAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal has been filed against the judgment dated 06.07.2015 of the Haryana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Panchkula ('the State Commission') in Consumer Complaint no. 62 of 2014, wherein the following order has been passed:

(2.) Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the proxy counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent. Learned counsel for the appellant states that the total cost of the flat was Rs.43,21,350/- and the appellant has paid Rs.19,46,000/. The complainant seeks refund of this amount along with 18% interest per annum. Learned counsel for the appellant states that the State Commission has only considered the amount of refund and not interest part. The larger Bench of this Commission in the case of Ambrish Kumar Shukla and Ors. Vs Ferrous Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., decided on 07.10.2016 (NC) has held that interest is to be added as part of compensation while deciding the pecuniary jurisdiction of Consumer Forum. Accordingly, the State Commission only has the jurisdiction and the matter be remanded to the State Commission for deciding the complaint on merits.

(3.) On the other hand, the proxy counsel appearing on behalf of the arguing the counsel for the respondent states that the two amounts would cross Rs.20 lakh, therefore, this Commission may decide the matter accordingly.