State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Sharchi Burdwan Developers Pvt. Ltd. vs Dr. Shilpa Nasreen on 28 February, 2017
Cause Title/Judgement-Entry STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION WEST BENGAL 11A, Mirza Ghalib Street, Kolkata - 700087 Revision Petition No. RP/100/2016 (Arisen out of Order Dated 02/05/2016 in Case No. Complaint Case No. CC/79/2016 of District Burdwan) 1. Sharchi Burdwan Developers Pvt. Ltd. Shrachi Towers, 686 Anandapur, E.M. Bypass, R.B. Connector Junction, Kolkata-700 107, rep. by its Director. 2. Shrachi Burdwan Developers Pvt. Ltd. Renaissance Township, near Nababhat More, N.H.-2, Goda, P.O., P.S. & Dist. Burdwan, Pin-713 102, rep. by its General Manager. 3. Lopamudra Ghosh(Marketing Development) Renaissance Township, near Nababhat More, N.H.-2, Goda, P.O., P.S. & Dist. Burdwan, Pin-713 102. ...........Appellant(s) Versus 1. Dr. Shilpa Nasreen D/o Nasirul Alam, presently at 62, B.P. Ghosh Road, Burdwan Residency-1, Block-2A, P.O., P.S. & Dist.- Burdwan, Pin-713 101. 2. Mr. Nasirul Alam S/o Lt. Ashraf Alam, presently at 62, B.P. Ghosh Road, Burdwan Residency-1, Block-2A, P.O., P.S. & Dist.- Burdwan, Pin-713 101. 3. Burdwan Development Authority New Administrative Building, Kacchari Road, Burdwan- 713 101, rep. by its Chairman. ...........Respondent(s) BEFORE: HON'BLE MR. SAMARESH PRASAD CHOWDHURY PRESIDING MEMBER HON'BLE MRS. MRIDULA ROY MEMBER For the Petitioner: Mr. Ved Sharma, Advocate For the Respondent: Mr. Debdas Mukhopadhyay, Advocate Dated : 28 Feb 2017 Final Order / Judgement Date of Filing - 27.05.2016 Date of Hearing - 13.02.2017 PER HON'BLE SAMARESH PRASAD CHOWDHURY, PRESIDING MEMBER
The instant Revisional Application under Section 17(1)(b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for brevity, 'the Act') is at the behest of Opposite Parties to impeach the Order No.02 dated 02.05.2016 made by the Ld. District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Burdwan (for short, Ld. District Forum) in Consumer Complaint no. 79/2016 whereby the ad-interim relief, as sought for by the Opposite Party nos. 1 & 2 herein under Section 13(3B) of the Act was allowed fixing 01.06.2016 for hearing of the application under Section 13(3B) of the Act in presence of the parties.
The OP nos. 1 & 2 herein being Complainants lodged the complaint under Section 12 of the Act with prayer for certain reliefs - (a) directing the OPs to deliver possession of the plot along with the bungalow being Plot bearing no.27A, Mapple Street Avenue-3 having an area 2.5 cotahs with Bungalow, Type-Parijat, measuring 776 sq. ft. (built up area) situated at Springdle-2 at Renaissance Township at Mouja- Goda, Kantrapota, Nababahat, Isufabad under P.S. & Dist- Burdwan. It is contended by the Complainant that in accordance with the terms of the agreement, their deceased mother Wohida Rehman and Complainant no.1 were under obligation to pay Rs.15,05,000/- and they have paid all the payments, save and except final instalment amount of Rs.1,54,000/- along with other charges which they were under obligation to pay at the time of receiving of the possession of the above mentioned plot with Bungalow before due dates. However, the OPs without delivering possession unilaterally cancelled the agreement. Therefore, on the allegation of deficiency in services on the part of the OPs, the OP nos. 1 & 2 herein approached the Ld. District Forum with prayer for - (a) to deliver possession of plot along with Bungalow after receipt of balance consideration amount, (b) Rs.3,50,000/- as compensation and (c) Rs.30,000/- as litigation cost.
At the time of the filing of the complaint, the Complainants have also filed an application under Section 12(1)(c) of the Act as the complaint has been filed by more than one consumers having the same interest and by the impugned order, the Ld. District Forum accorded permission to that effect fixing 01.06.2016 for S.R. and appearance of the OPs. On the prayer, the Ld. District Forum also passed an ad-interim order, considering the urgency the situation as the OPs unilaterally cancelled the agreement and refunded Rs.11,79,322/- after deduction of a sum of Rs.1,71,178/-. That order was an interim order and not a final one. The Revisionists being OPs had opportunity to file objection against the said application before the Ld. District Forum and to resist the prayer of the Complainants but without adhereing to the same, the OPs have come up in this Commission with the instant Revision Petition.
We have considered the rival contention of the parties. The revisional jurisdiction of the State Commission flows from Section 17(1)(b) of the Act, which runs as under:-
"to call for the records and pass appropriate orders in any consumer dispute which is pending before or has been decided by any District Forum within the State, where it appears to the State Commission that such District Forum has exercised a jurisdiction not vested in it by law, or has failed to exercise a jurisdiction so vested or has acted in exercise of its jurisdiction illegally or with material irregularity".
Therefore, the power of this Commission sitting in revision is very limited and it can be exercised only if there is jurisdictional error or material irregularity in passing the order impugned. Admittedly, the Ld. District Forum did not commit any jurisdictional error by entertaining the application. Now, whether there is any material irregularity or not in passing the order impugned can only be appreciated if we have a look to the provisions of Section 13(3B) of the Act which provides -
"Where during the pendency of any proceeding before the District Forum, it appears to it necessary, it may pass such interim order as is just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case".
In the case before hand, it is quite clear that the developer unilaterally has cancelled the agreement and refunded a certain amount of part consideration amount after deduction of a portion of the same through an A/C payee cheque. It implies that the developer may at any moment create any third party interest over the property. Therefore, by a reasoned order, the Ld. District Forum has passed an ad-interim order in order to preserve the property. So, the said order cannot be faulted with.
After giving due consideration to the submission advanced on behalf of the parties, we do not find any material irregularity in passing the order impugned which requires any interference by this Commission exercising its revisional jurisdiction.
Consequently, the instant revision petition is dismissed on contest. However, we do not make any order as to costs.
The impugned order is hereby affirmed.
The parties are directed to appear before the Ld. District Forum on 15.03.2017 to receive further order from the said authority. The Ld. District Forum is requested to dispose of the application under Section 13(3B) of the Act after hearing both sides in accordance with law.
The Registrar of the Commission is directed to send a copy of this order to the Ld. District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Burdwan for information.
[HON'BLE MR. SAMARESH PRASAD CHOWDHURY] PRESIDING MEMBER [HON'BLE MRS. MRIDULA ROY] MEMBER