Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Mysore Urban Development Authority ... vs Sachdeepak Singh Arora on 29 March, 2019
Bench: Uday Umesh Lalit, Indu Malhotra
1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO.3301 OF 2019
(@ SLP (C) No(s). 26184/2018)
MYSORE URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY Appellant(s)
VERSUS
SACHDEEPAK SINGH ARORA Respondent(s)
O R D E R
Leave granted.
On 11.02.2019 notice was issued in the matter. We have heard learned counsel for both sides.
In the present matter, the District Forum while allowing the complaint had passed the following directions:
“..
2. The respondent shall give the complainant the site measuring 50x80 at the rate fixed earlier by receiving the balance consideration and register it in the name of complainant within two months from the date of this Order. In case of failure, the respondent is liable to pay compensation of Rs.100/- per day from the date of the order until the registration.
3. The respondent shall pay Rs.5,000/- towards the mental harassment and Rs.2,000/- towards litigation expenses. In case of failure, the complainant is liable to get 9% from the date of this order until the realization of entire amount of Rs.7,000/-.
4. If the respondent fails to comply with this order Signature Not Verified for two months from the date of this order, the Digitally signed by INDU MARWAH Date: 2019.04.23 respondent is liable to be prosecuted under criminal 17:24:08 IST Reason: proceedings for imprisonment and fine as provided under Section 27 of the Consumer Protection Act.” It is a matter of record that the total consideration for the 2 plot in question was Rs.3,03,000/- but a sum of Rs.3,024/- only was deposited at the time of booking of the plot and nothing was deposited after allotment. In the circumstances, the allotment came to be cancelled on 06.01.2005. The District Forum set aside the cancellation and passed the aforesaid directions. The appeal preferred by the appellant came to be dismissed by the National Commission on the ground of delay of 220 days. The revision arising therefrom was again delayed by 45 days. The National Commission did not condone the delay as a result of which the revision was also dismissed.
It is thus clear that the matter was not assessed on merits by the State Commission as well as by the National Commission. The appellant definitely has a case and the issue whether the cancellation was justified or not ought to have been gone into by the State Commission as well as by the National Commission. We, therefore, set aside the order passed by the State Commission as well as by the National Commission. The appeal before the State Commission is restored to file. We condone the delay in filing the appeal and direct the State Commission to dispose of the appeal within six months. The parties to appear before the State Commission on 15.04.2019.
We have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the matter which will be gone into by the State Commission at appropriate stage.
3The appeal is allowed in aforesaid terms.
………………………………………………………………….J. [UDAY UMESH LALIT] …………………………………………………………………....J. [INDU MALHOTRA ] New Delhi, March 29, 2019 4 ITEM NO.46 COURT NO.7 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 26184/2018 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 08-06-2018 in RP No. 2174/2016 passed by the National Consumers Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi) MYSORE URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY Petitioner(s) VERSUS SACHDEEPAK SINGH ARORA Respondent(s) Date : 29-03-2019 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UDAY UMESH LALIT HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDU MALHOTRA For Petitioner(s) Mr. Sharan Thakur, Adv.
Mr. Vijaykumar Paradeshi, Adv. Dr. Sushil Balwada, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. C.B. Gururaj, Adv.
Mr. Prakash Ranjan Nayak, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Leave granted.
The appeal is allowed in terms of the signed order. Pending applications, if any, shall also stand disposed of.
(INDU MARWAH) (RAJINDER KAUR) COURT MASTER BRANCH OFFICER
(signed order is placed on the file)