State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Mahesh Batra vs Motia Constructions Limited on 31 October, 2012
2nd Bench
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SECTOR 37-A, DAKSHIN MARG, CHANDIGARH.
First Appeal No.896 of 2009.
Date of Institution: 30.06.2009.
Date of Decision: 31.10.2012.
Mahesh Batra S/o Sh. B.L. Batra And
Ms Manju Batra W/o Sh. Mahesh Batra;
Both Residents of House No.82, Sector 18-A, Chandigarh.
.....Appellants.
Versus
1. Motia Constructions Limited, Royal Estate, Chandigarh-Delhi Highway,
NAC, Zirakpur, District Mohali (Punjab), through its Managing Director.
2. BCL Homes, Property Big Bazar, opposite Balaji Enclave, Patiala
Road, Zirakpur, District Mohali, through Mr. Gopal Bansal.
...Respondents.
First Appeal against the order dated
08.06.2009 of the District Consumer
Disputes Redressal Forum, S.A.S.
Nagar, Mohali (in short, 'the District
Forum').
Before:-
Shri Inderjit Kaushik, Presiding Member.
Shri Baldev Singh Sekhon, Member.
...................................
Present:- Sh. Surjeet Bhadu, Advocate, proxy for Sh. Vikram Batra, Advocate, counsel for the appellants.
Sh. Arun Kumar Batra, Advocate, counsel for respondent no.1. Respondent no.2 Exparte.
----------------------------------------
INDERJIT KAUSHIK, PRESIDING MEMBER:-
This order shall dispose of the following five (5) appeals, as the similar question of facts and law are involved in all the appeals and the appeals are directed against the similar orders and the complaints are against the same construction company:-
Sr. No. Appeal No. Parties Name
First Appeal No.896 of 2009 2
1. F.A. No.896 of 2009 Mahesh Batra Vs Motia
Constructions Ltd. & Anr.
2. F.A. No.951 of 2009 Motia Constructions Ltd. Vs
Mahesh Batra & Anr.
(Sr. No.1 & 2 against the same order dated 08.06.2009 passed by the District Forum, S.A.S. Nagar, Mohali),
3. F.A. No.1320 of 2009 Motia Constructions Ltd. Vs Amita Bansal (Against the order dated 05.08.2009 passed by the District Forum, S.A.S. Nagar, Mohali),
4. F.A. No.322 of 2010 Motia Constructions Ltd. Vs Suman Bhardwaj & Anr.
5. F.A. No.338 of 2010 Suman Bhardwaj & Anr Vs Motia Constructions Ltd.
(Sr. No.4 & 5 against the same order dated 21.01.2010 passed by the District Forum, S.A.S. Nagar, Mohali).
The facts are taken from F.A. No.896 of 2009 and the parties would be referred by their status in this appeal.
2. Facts in brief are that the appellants/complainants (hereinafter called "the appellants") filed a complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (in short, "the Act") against the respondents, asserting that they purchased Apartment No.601 on Floor No.6 in MCL Tower No.4 vide allotment letter no.319 dated 22.10.2005 through respondent no.2, who is authorized agent of respondent no.1 and respondent no.2 received Rs.1.00 lac on behalf of respondent no.1 vide draft no.228204 at Chandigarh. At the time of the said purchase, the possession of flat was promised and agreed to be delivered by the respondents within 18 months and besides that, it was also promised that the flat will include three split and one window AC upto 5 KV Power back-up, as there is eight hours power cut daily in the summer.
3. The appellants regularly made the payment to respondent no.1 as per the schedule of payment and even on one occasion paid the interest @ 24% p.a. on delayed payment. The total payment of Rs.25,01,000/- was made, but despite that the respondents did not comply with its commitments and failed to deliver the possession of the flat to the appellants and that too First Appeal No.896 of 2009 3 against the specifications assured. The appellants requested the respondents vide letter dated 03.12.2007 and 19.12.2007 to rectify the defects and to provide the possession of the said flat, but the respondents neither rectified the defects nor delivered the possession in time and gave letter dated 22.12.2007 without giving any clarifications or consideration to the requests made by the appellants. Thereafter, the letters dated 26.12.2007 and 11.03.2008 were sent to the respondents. The possession certificate of the flat was delivered to the appellants on 27.03.2008 i.e. after about eleven months' delay despite repeated requests, which amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice.
4. As the flat was purchased from respondent no.2 at Chandigarh from his earlier office at Madhya Marg, Chandigarh, the appellants filed a complaint under the Act at Chandigarh, but as respondent no.2 shifted his office from Chandigarh to Zirakpur, he was served at his new address, but was proceeded against exparte and respondent no.1 denied its relationship with respondent no.2 and, as such, the complaint was withdrawn with liberty to file it before the appropriate Forum. The flat is situated at Zirakpur and respondent no.1 has also its office at Zirakpur and is within the jurisdiction of the Forum.
5. The appellants suffered loss of Rs.5,50,220/- on account of delay of 11 months in delivering the possession and are entitled to recover interest @ 24% p.a. They suffered further loss of Rs.3.00 lacs on account of not providing the flat as per the specifications as promised which included three split and one window AC upto 5 KV back-up and not providing lift, road and other amenities in the flat as per the sample flat, and interest @ 15% p.a. from the date of handing over the possession of flat till realization and Rs.50,000/- as compensation and Rs.22,000/- as litigation costs.
6. It was prayed that the respondents be directed to pay Rs.8,20,220/- along with interest @ 15% p.a. from the date of delivery of First Appeal No.896 of 2009 4 possession till its actual realization and Rs.50,000/- as compensation and Rs.22,000/- as litigation costs.
7. In the written reply filed on behalf of the respondent no.1, it was admitted that the appellants booked an Apartment No.601 on Floor No.6 in MCL Tower No.4 with respondent no.1 company and Buyer Agreement was executed between the parties. The apartment booked by the appellants was not a deluxe AC luxury apartment and the prices of the AC luxury apartment as well as the apartment booked by the appellants are different with different specifications and the price list is also different. The appellant paid Rs.27,71,111/- and the last payment was made on 27.03.2008 i.e. at the time of obtaining the possession by the appellants from the respondent. The flat was never purchased through respondent no.2. Due to act and conduct of the appellants, the possession was obtained by them on 27.03.2008, whereas the other allottees of the same Tower took the possession way back on 17.10.2007, which is evident from the possession letter of Shyam Sethi. The appellants have delayed in obtaining the possession on one pretext or the other and the affidavit of the Engineer of the said Tower proves the same. The flats were ready for possession well within time inspite of the shortage of cement and other problems and the appellants have filed the complaint on wrong facts and there is no deficiency in service on the part of the respondents in providing the possession and the complaint is liable to be dismissed.
8. As per the agreement, the disputes are to be referred to the arbitrator and the appellants have not complied with the terms and conditions of the agreement. The appellants have also concealed material facts and have tried to mislead the Forum. The flat booked by the appellants was not an AC luxury flat and no assurance was given to the appellants that besides the flat, three split and one window AC of 5 KV back-up will be provided. No such condition was mentioned in the allotment letter as well as in the agreement. At the time of taking the possession of the apartment, no such demand was First Appeal No.896 of 2009 5 raised. The appellants checked the construction before taking the possession and gave the undertaking that they will have no claim against the company at any point of time in future. The filing of the complaint is the abuse of process of law. Similar other pleas were repeated and it was further pleaded that the complaint is bad for mis-joinder of parties and is liable to be dismissed on the principle of resjudicata. Other allegations of the complaint were denied and it was prayed that the complaint may be dismissed with costs.
9. Respondent no.2 did not contest the complaint before the District Forum and was proceeded against exparte vide order dated 17.04.2009 of the District Forum.
10. Contesting parties led evidence in support of their respective contentions by way of affidavits and documents.
11. After going through the documents and material placed on file and after hearing the learned counsel for the parties, the learned District Forum observed that for the late delivery of possession, the developer is liable to pay compensation in the shape of interest to the allottee on the amount deposited by him for the period of delay. Respondent no.1 is liable to pay interest to the appellants to the tune of Rs.1,87,575/- for delayed delivery of possession. The flat in question is simple flat without luxuries. The rates of the simple and luxury apartments are different, as is clear from price list Ex.R3 and the appellants are not entitled to any compensation on this account. Rs.20,000/- was awarded as compensation and Rs.4,000/- as litigation expenses. Respondent no.1 was directed to pay Rs.2,07,575/- to the appellants along with interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of order till the date of payment.
12. Aggrieved by the impugned order dated 08.06.2009, the appellants have come up in the present appeal, with a prayer to enhance the compensation.
First Appeal No.896 of 2009 6
13. On the other hand, respondent no.1-Motia Construction Limited has filed cross appeal i.e. F.A. No.951 of 2009 (Motia Construction Limited Vs Mahesh Batra & Anr.), seeking setting aside of the impugned order.
14. We have gone through the pleadings of the parties, perused the record of the learned District Forum and have heard the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the appellants and respondent no.1.
15. The respondent no.2 has not contested the appeal and was proceeded against exparte.
16. It was contended on behalf of the appellants that respondent no.1 charged interest @ 24% p.a. for one delayed payment, whereas despite payment of the entire cost of the flat, the possession was not delivered. Several reminders and letters were written and ultimately, the possession of the flat in question was delivered on 27.03.2008 i.e. after the delay of more than 11 months. Respondent no.1 was to give the flat in question with agreed specifications and to provide three split AC and one window AC, power back- up, lift, road and other amenities etc. The District Forum has held that it is a case of deficiency of service, but has not awarded the total amount and interest @ 24% p.a. As per Clause-7 of the agreement, the allottee has to pay interest @ 24% p.a. and respondent no.1 is also liable to pay the same rate of interest for late delivery of possession. As per allotment letter Ex.C-3, balance amount of Rs.2,70,111/- was payable by the allottee at the time of possession and vide Ex.C-13 dated 27.03.2008, the amount of Rs.2,70,111/- was paid. Possession certificate Ex.C-19 further proves that the possession was given on 27.03.2008. It was further contended that as per the terms and conditions of the agreement and allotment letter, the possession of the flat was to be delivered on 01.07.2007 and the appellants are entitled to recover interest @ 24% on the total cost of the flat for the period 01.07.2007 to 27.03.2008 for delayed delivery of possession.
17. On the other hand, counsel for the respondent no.1 argued that the possession was ready, but the appellants did not take the possession on First Appeal No.896 of 2009 7 one pretext or the other and by their own act and conduct delayed the delivery of possession. The appellants did not book the AC luxurious flat, but it was a simple flat and the rate lists for the luxurious flat and other flats were different. Vide Ex.R-5 dated 18.11.2010, respondent no.1 wrote to the appellants to take the possession of the flat. Letter Ex.R-6 was also written, but the appellants did not take the possession, whereas the similarly placed allottees took the possession on 17.10.2007. It was contended that vide affidavit Ex.R-9, the appellant gave undertaking that he will have no claim against the company at any point of time in future with regard to the flat in question and ultimately, he was handed over the possession vide Ex.R-10. It was contended that respondent no.1 despite the difficulties and shortage of cement, etc. completed the construction in time in order to fulfill its commitment, as is clear from letters Ex.R-11 and Ex.R-12. It has been contended that the order passed by the District Forum is against the facts and evidence and is liable to be set aside.
18. We have considered the respective submissions made on behalf of the parties and have thoroughly examined the entire documents and other material placed on the record.
19. Vide allotment letter Ex.C-3 dated 22.10.2005, the appellants were allotted an Apartment No.610 in MCL Tower No.4 at the proposed residential project 'Motiaz' Royal Estate at Zirakpur (NAC). As per Buyer's Agreement Ex.C-1, the respondent company was to deliver the possession of the apartment/dwelling unit within 18 months from the date of allotment to the allottee after receipt of the payment as per the payment plan applicable to the allottee. In Clause-11 of this agreement, certain conditions were mentioned which could delay the delivery of possession, but none of those conditions are applicable, as even the shortage of cement was met by the respondent company by their own efforts and that was not a reason for the delay in delivery of possession. The appellants paid the entire amount as per receipts Ex.C-4 to Ex.C-12 and the remaining amount of Rs.2,70,111/- was to be paid First Appeal No.896 of 2009 8 at the time of delivery of possession. Last receipt Ex.C-12 is dated 26.05.2007 and the appellants were ready to take the possession. On receipt of the letter dated 16.11.2007 Ex.R-5 written by the respondents, the appellants wrote letter Ex.C-14 dated 03.12.2007 to the respondents, pointing out the defects in the construction and requested to handover the possession after rectifying the defects immediately. The appellants wrote letter Ex.C-15 dated 19.12.2007, Ex.C-16 dated 22.12.2007, Ex.C-17 dated 26.12.2007 and reminder Ex.C-18 dated 11.03.2008 to remove the defects and to handover the possession at the earliest and lastly vide Possession Certificate Ex.C-19, the possession was delivered to the appellants on 27.03.2008. Vide letter Ex.C-20, the appellants demanded interest @ 24% p.a. on the cost of the flat for the period 01.07.2007 to 27.03.2008 as per the terms and conditions of the agreement as well as to provide other facilities. Another letter Ex.C-20 was written to pay the interest.
20. The plea taken by the respondents is that the appellants themselves delayed the delivery of possession and did not take delivery of possession immediately, whereas the other allottees like Shyam Sethi received the possession on 17.10.2007. This plea is not tenable because the appellants paid the entire amount which was due to be paid to the respondents, as discussed above, and requested to handover the possession and on visiting the apartment in question, found certain defects and even the lift was also not functional and the same were pointed out and letters and reminders were written to the respondents to rectify the defects, but till 27.03.2008 those defects were not removed and ultimately on 27.03.2008, the possession was delivered to the appellants and the appellants as per the commitment paid Rs.2,70,111/- as the remaining payment vide receipt Ex.C- 13 dated 27.03.2008. The appellants have complied with the commitment as well as the Buyer's Agreement, whereas the respondents failed to do so. The letters Ex.R-11 and Ex.R-12 are also of no help to the respondents, because the respondents themselves offered the possession to other allottees, but the First Appeal No.896 of 2009 9 apartment allotted to the appellants was not free from defects and, as such, the possession could not be delivered. The affidavit Ex.R-9 dated 27.03.2008 was taken from the appellants at the time of delivery of possession and this affidavit is also not attested by any Notary Public or Oath Commissioner or Magistrate and, as such, it has no meaning in the eyes of law. Clause-7 of the Buyer's Agreement is relevant and the same is reproduced as under:-
(7) "That the timely payment is essence of the agreement. In case the installments are not made on due dates, the allottee shall pay 24% p.a. for three months on due amounts from due date till date of payment and no extension will be allowed after three months".
21. The appellants made the timely payments, except one delayed payment, and fulfilled the commitment, but have to pay 24% p.a. on one installment. The vice-versa is applicable on the respondents. The appellants paid the last installment on 26.05.2007, whereas as per the allotment letter dated 22.10.2005 Ex.C-3, the possession was to be delivered after 18 months i.e. on or before 22.04.2007. The payment of Rs.3,04,287/- was made vide received Ex.C-12 on 26.05.2007 and by that time, the appellants have paid Rs.25,14,221/-. The possession was delivered on 27.03.2008 and the respondents utilized the said amount for 10 months and the interest @ 24% p.a. on this amount exceeds Rs.5.00 lacs, but the District Forum has awarded only interest to the tune of Rs.1,87,575/-, Rs.20,000/- as compensation and Rs.4,000/- as litigation expenses and in all, Rs.2,07,575/-. The District Forum has also awarded the interest @ 9% p.a., but the interest and compensation cannot be awarded together.
22. The District Forum has rightly held that the rates of the simple and luxurious apartments were different and the appellants are not entitled to any relief qua that.
First Appeal No.896 of 2009 10
23. In view of above discussion, the order of the District Forum, awarding compensation to the appellants to the tune of Rs.20,000/- is set aside. However, the remaining amount is enhanced to Rs.3,50,000/- (Rupees Three Lacs Fifty Thousand) in lumpsum and respondent no.1 is directed to pay Rs.3,50,000/- to the appellants along with interest @ 9% p.a. from 26.05.2007 till realization. The order of the District Forum under appeal dated 08.06.2009 is accordingly modified and the appeal stands disposed of. First Appeal No.951 of 2009:-
24. In view of the reasons and discussion held in F.A. No.986 of 2009 (Mahesh Batra Vs Motia Constructions Limited & Anr.), the F.A. No.951 of 2009 (Motia Contructions Limited Vs Mahesh Batra & Anr.), is disposed of and the impugned order dated 08.06.2009 under appeal passed by the District Forum is modified, as mentioned above.
25. The appellant had deposited an amount of Rs.25,000/- with this Commission at the time of filing of the appeal. This amount with interest accrued thereon, if any, be remitted by the registry to the respondent no.1/complainants by way of a crossed cheque/demand draft after the expiry of 45 days under intimation to the learned District Forum and to the appellant.
26. Remaining amount as per this order shall be paid by the appellant to respondent no.1/complainants within 60 days of the receipt of copy of the order.
First Appeal No.1320 of 2009:-
27. Similarly, in F.A. No.1320 of 2009 (Motia Construction Limited Vs Amita Bansal), Apartment No.103, A-Type on 1st Floor in MCL Tower No.13 was allotted to Sh. Sultan Singh S/o Sh. Mange Ram, C/o D.R. Mehta, 202/36, Sector-20, Panchkula, vide allotment letter no.A.L. 279 dated 19.06.2005, for Rs.22,21,111/-, which included Rs.70,000/- as car parking.
The respondent/complainant, with the approval of the appellant, got re- allotted the said apartment in her name, along with car parking vide consent/approval/allotment no.RAL-132 dated 14.11.2007. The 90% of the First Appeal No.896 of 2009 11 total payment was made and remaining 10% was to be paid at the time of possession. As per re-allotment letter dated 14.11.2007, the possession of apartment was to be delivered to the respondent within 30 days after receipt of full amount or within 18 months from the date of application i.e. 19.06.2005, but the possession has not been delivered till date. The apartment in question is still under construction. Appellant was requested to deliver the possession vide letter dated 15.02.2008, 21.03.2008, 05.06.2008, 10.06.2008 and 14.08.2008 and 08.12.2008, but to no effect. The respondent suffered loss of interest on principal amount of Rs.22,21,111/- @ 18% per annum w.e.f. due date i.e. October, 2006 which comes to Rs.10,00,000/- approx. whereas the appellant received interest @ 24% p.a. from the respondent which comes to Rs.12,00,000/- and the respondent is entitled to the interest at lower rate i.e. @ 18% totaling Rs.10,00,000/-. She is also entitled to Rs.3,00,000/- for loss of reputation and Rs.2,00,000/- for mental harassment and in all, claims Rs.15,00,000/- from the appellants.
28. The complaint was contested by the appellant by filing written reply on the similar lines of its reply filed in F.A. No.896 of 2009 and further submitted that apartments were ready for possession in April, 2008, but the respondent by her own act and conduct did not receive the possession. Finally, possession was delivered to the respondent on 11.02.2009 to their satisfaction about the quality, fitting/furnishing and layout scheme of the flat and she gave undertaking that any point of time in future she will have not claim in respect of the same.
29. The District Forum vide its order dated 05.08.2009, allowed the complaint, directing the appellant to pay a sum of Rs.1,81,800/- @ 9% interest per annum on the principal amount of Rs.20,20,000/-, and Rs.5,000/- as litigation expenses within one month from the receipt of copy of order, failing which the awarded amount shall carry interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of complaint till payment.
First Appeal No.896 of 2009 12
30. The respondent/complainant has not filed any appeal against the above order dated 05.08.2009 for enhancement of the compensation.
31. The appellant received 90% of the total price of the apartment i.e. Rs.22,21,111/- at the time of initial allotment to Sh. Sultan Singh vide allotment letter dated 14.11.2007 and remaining 10% amount i.e. Rs.2,01,111/- was to be paid at the time of possession. Thus, total amount earlier paid comes to Rs.20,20,000/-. The possession was delivered to the respondent vide Possession Certificate Ex.R-7. First letter of possession Ex.C-12/Ex.R-4 was sent by the appellant in the first week of December, 2008 and after giving a margin of three months for completion of construction to the appellant w.e.f. 14.11.2007, the appellant is guilty of deficiency in service for delaying the delivery of possession w.e.f. 14.02.2008 to 11.02.2009. The appellant utilized the amount of the respondent during this period and the District Forum has rightly held the appellant liable to pay Rs.1,81,800/- being the interest @ 9% p.a. on the above amount and there is no ground to interfere with the order of the District Forum.
32. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the appellant is dismissed and the impugned order dated 05.08.2009 passed by the District Forum is affirmed and upheld. No order as to costs.
33. The appellants had deposited an amount of Rs.25,000/- with this Commission at the time of filing of the appeal. This amount with interest accrued thereon, if any, be remitted by the registry to the respondent/complainant by way of a crossed cheque/demand draft after the expiry of 45 days under intimation to the learned District Forum and to the appellant.
33. Remaining amount as per the order of the District Forum shall be paid by the appellant to the respondent/complainant within two months of the receipt of copy of the order.
First Appeal No.338 of 2010:-
First Appeal No.896 of 2009 13
34. Similarly, in F.A. No.338 of 2010 (Suman Bhardwaj & Anr. Vs Motia Construction Limited), the appellants purchased apartment No.501 on 5th Floor in MCL Tower No.11, Zirakpur from the respondent vide re- allotment letter no.223 dated 26.07.2005, by paying margin money of Rs.1.00 lac as earnest money vide two cheques. The original allottee was Sh. Randhir Singh Virk and an additional amount of Rs.42,375/- charged by the respondent for re-allotment of the said flat, which was paid vide cheque dated 01.08.2005. Possession was to be delivered within 18 months from the date of allotment with certain facilities, including three split and one window ACs and upto 5 KV power back-up. The appellants regularly made the payments and on two occasions of late payments, they paid interest @ 24% p.a. to the respondent. The sale price of the flat was Rs.20,91,111/-, out of which the respondents have already paid Rs.20,05,812/- and the remaining 5% of the amount was to be paid to the respondent at the time of delivery of possession. Till filing of complaint, the possession was not delivered and the respondent is liable to pay interest @ 24% on the amount received by it for not delivering the possession. It was prayed that the respondent be directed to pay interest to the tune of Rs.12,83,720/- @ 24% p.a. on Rs.20,05,812/- w.e.f. 26.01.2007 to 26.09.2009, to deliver possession of the flat with all promised facilities, to pay further interest @ 15% on the amount awarded for delay of payment, if any, and Rs.1,00,000/- for mental agony and harassment.
35. The complaint was contested the respondent by filing written reply on the same lines of its reply filed in F.A. No.896 of 2009.
36. The District Forum vide its order dated 21.01.2010, allowed the complaint, directing the respondent to pay a sum of Rs.4,09,335/- @ 9% interest per annum on the principal amount of Rs.18,82,000/- and further interest at the aforesaid rate on the aforesaid principal amount w.e.f. 26.09.2009 till the date of delivery of possession, to deliver the possession of the flat complete in all respects to the appellants within three months from the First Appeal No.896 of 2009 14 date of receipt of copy of the order and pay Rs.5,000/- as litigation expenses, within one month from the receipt of copy of order, failing which the awarded amount shall carry interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of complaint till payment.
37. Perusal of the Buyer's Agreement Ex.C-5 shows the total sale price of the flat was Rs.20,91,111/-. As per re-allotment letter Ex.C-4, Rs.2,09,111/- was payable at the time of possession, as such, a sum of Rs.18,82,000/- has been paid for the flat in question to the respondent. The respondent has utilized this amount for 29 months i.e. w.e.f. 26.04.2007 to 26.09.2009 and the interest @ 24% p.a. on this amount around Rs.10.00 lacs, but the District Forum has awarded only interest to the tune of Rs.4,09,335/- along with interest @ 9% p.a. on the principle amount of Rs.18,82,000/- and Rs.5,000/- as litigation expenses. Thus, the order of the District Forum required modification.
38. In view of above discussion as well as in view of the reasons and discussion held in F.A. No.896 of 2009 (Mahesh Batra Vs Motia Construction Limited & Anr.), the F.A. No.338 of 2010 (Suman Bhardwaj & Anr. Vs Motia Construction Limited), is accepted and the order dated 21.01.2010 under appeal passed by the District Forum is modified to the extent that the awarded amount of Rs.4,09,335/- is enhanced to Rs.6,00,000/- (Rupees Six Lacs) and the respondent shall pay this amount of Rs.6,00,000/- to the appellant with 9% interest per annum from 26.04.2007 till the delivery of possession of the flat. Remaining part of the order is affirmed and upheld.
First Appeal No.322 of 2010:-
39. In view of the reasons and discussion held in F.A. No.896 of 2009 (Mahesh Batra Vs Motia Construction Limited & Anr.), as well as in F.A. No.338 of 2010 (Suman Bhardwaj & Anr. Vs Motia Construction Limited), the F.A. No.322 of 2010 (Motia Construction Limited Vs Suman Bhardwaj & Anr.), is dismissed and the order dated 21.01.2010 under First Appeal No.896 of 2009 15 appeal passed by the District Forum is modified to the extent mentioned above.
40. The appellant had deposited an amount of Rs.25,000/- with this Commission at the time of filing of the appeal and another sum of Rs.1,00,000/- vide receipt dated 18.05.2010. Both these amounts with interest accrued thereon, if any, be remitted by the registry to the respondents/complainants in equal shares by way of a crossed cheque/demand draft after the expiry of 45 days under intimation to the learned District Forum and to the appellant.
41. Remaining entire amount shall be paid by the appellant to the respondents/complainants within two months of the receipt of copy of the order.
42. The arguments in all the appeals were heard on 26.10.2012 and the orders were reserved. Now the orders be communicated to the parties.
43. The appeals could not be decided within the stipulated timeframe due to heavy pendency of court cases.
44. Copy of the order be placed in the following cases:-
2. F.A. No.951 of 2009 Motia Constructions Ltd. Vs Mahesh Batra & Anr.
3. F.A. No.1320 of 2009 Motia Constructions Ltd. Vs Amita Bansal
4. F.A. No.322 of 2010 Motia Constructions Ltd. Vs Suman Bhardwaj & Anr.
5. F.A. No.338 of 2010 Suman Bhardwaj & Anr Vs Motia Constructions Ltd.
(Inderjit Kaushik) Presiding Member (Baldev Singh Sekhon) Member October 31, 2012.
(Gurmeet S)