National Consumer Disputes Redressal
Huda And Anr. vs Subhash Chander And Anr. on 23 October, 2003
ORDER
B.K. Taimni, Member
1. Petitioner was the complainant before the District Forum.
2. Brief facts of the case are that the Respondent/Complainant was allotted a plot in 1998 possession of which could not be delivered in time and subsequently the Petitioner allotted an alternative plot only in Sept. 1999, i.e., after a gap of 21 years. Thus, alleging deficiency in service on the part of the Petitioner a complaint was filed before the District Forum, who after hearing the parties allowed the complaint in following terms:-
"We hereby allowed the complaint by giving the direction to the respondents to not violate the terms and conditions of previous letter and give 2 years' time for completion of construction. Respondents are further directed to give Rs. 1,00,000/- as escalation charges and compensation on account of delay in allotment of the alternative plot to the complainant. Cost of litigation Rs. 1000/- is also awarded to the complainant which shall be paid by the respondents. Order shall be complied within one month from the date of decision."
3. An appeal filed by the Petitioner before the State Commission was allowed to the extent that compensation awarded by way of price escalation was reduced from Rs. 1 lakh to Rs. 50,000/-. Aggrieved by this order Petitioner had filed this Revision Petition before us.
4. It is the case of Learned Counsel of the Petitioner that as per the terms and conditions, the construction should have been completed within 6 months from the date of allotment of an alternative plot. All these points have been gone into by the lower forums and found that for not fault of the Complainant, the Petitioner took 21 years to allot an alternative plot during which period the cost of construction certainly had escalated. The terms of allotment cannot be charged to the detriment of the original allotment in which 2 years' period was given for completion of construction. The Order passed by the District Forum as affirmed by the State Commission with certain modification is as per settled law and calls for no interference. This Revision Petition is devoid of merit - hence dismissed.