State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Shri Manojkumar Nemaji Shahare vs Shri Dhammachari Amrut Siddhi on 6 July, 2012
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, MAHARASHTRA
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, MAHARASHTRA
CIRCUIT BENCH AT NAGPUR
5 TH FLOOR, ADMINISTRATIVE BUILDING NO. 1
CIVIL LINES, NAGPUR-440 001
First Appeal No. A/437/09
(Arisen out of Order Dated 28/04/2009 in Case No. 249/2008 of Additional District Forum, Nagpur)
1.
Shri Manojkumar Nemaji Shahare,
2.
Shrimati Shalini Manojkumar Shahare,
Both residents of C/o Mahesh
Vanjari,
At. Bhilgaon, Post Khairi, Tq.
Kamptee,
District Nagpur. ..... Appellant (s)
Versus
1.
Shri Dhammachari Amrut Siddhi,
R/o. Plot No. 187, Nalandanagar,
Nari Road, Post Uppalwadi,
Near Telephone Exchange, Nari,
Nagpur.
2.
Shri Vilas Balkrushna Nitnaware,
R/o. Plot No. 187, Nalandanagar,
Nari Road, Post Uppalwadi,
Near Telephone Exchange, Nari,
Nagpur. .....
Respondent(s)
BEFORE:
Hon'ble Mr.S.M. Shembole PRESIDING
MEMBER
HON'BLE SMT.JAYSHREE YENGAL MEMBER
HON'BLE MR.N. ARUMUGAM MEMBER
PRESENT:
ADV. SOLAT, Advocate for the
Appellant
ADV. MESHRAM, Advocate for the
Respondent
ORDER
(Delivered on 06/07/2012) Per Mr S M Shembole, Hon'ble Presiding Member
1. This appeal is an exception to the judgment and order dated 28/04/2009 passed by Additional District Consumer Forum, Nagpur in Consumer Complaint No.249/2008 dismissing the complaint.
Brief facts giving raise to this appeal are that,
2. Appellants/Original Complainants have purchased a plot from the respondents/ opponents vide sale deed dated 11/11/2004. (for the sake of brevity the appellants have hereinafter referred as complainants and Respondent as Opponent). It is alleged that though the Opponents executed the sale deed in favour of the complainants mentioning therein that the respondents/ opponents have delivered the possession of the plot, it was not actually delivered. It is further alleged that the opponents created obstruction in the construction of complainants. Therefore, according to the complainants the opponents committed deficiency in service and, therefore, they have filed the consumer complaint, claiming compensation at Rs.10,00,000/- and further Rs.20,000/- towards cost of proceeding.
3. In response to the complaint notice, the opponents appeared before the Additional District Consumer Forum, Nagpur and resisted the complaint vide their written version denying the complainant's claim in toto. However, they have admitted that they sold the plot to the complainants and executed the sale deed and at the same time, delivered the possession of the plot. They have denied all other adverse averments and submitted to dismiss the complaint.
4. On hearing both the sides and considering the documents on record, Additional District Consumer Forum, Nagpur held that there is no deficiency in service on the part of opponents and, therefore, the same is not tenable and dismissed the complaint.
5. Feeling aggrieved by the impugned judgment and order complainants have preferred this appeal.
6. At the time of hearing before admission, we heard Ld. Counsel for both the sides, perused the copies of complaint, written version and impugned judgment and order and decided to dispose of this appeal finally.
7. It is submitted by Mr. Solat, Ld. Counsel for the complainants that though in the sale deed it is mentioned that the possession of plot is delivered at the time of execution and registeration of the sale deed, in fact, the possession was not given. It is further submitted that when the complainants made efforts to make construction on the disputed plot, opponents created obstruction and, therefore, they could not make construction and, thereby, sustained loss. But, Mr. Solat, Ld. Counsel for the complainants could not explain as to why the complainants have not received the possession of the disputed plot when it was clearly mentioned in the sale deed showing delivery of possession of plot. He also could not explain as to how the complainants have started construction on disputed plot it possession was not given. Moreover, even if, it is considered that the possession of the plot was not given as shown in the sale deed and thereafter the opponents made obstruction in the construction work of the complainants, it can not be considered as a deficiency in service and, therefore, it can not be a Consumer dispute.
8. Mr. B.L. Meshram, Ld. Counsel for the opponents submitted that the possession of the disputed plot has already been given to the complainants as shown in the sale deed and transaction was already completed and, therefore, there is no relation between the complaints and opponents as a Consumer and Service Provider. Considering the fact that, sale deed of the plot is executed by opponents in favour of complainants showing delivery of the possession of the same to the complainants, as shown in the sale deed and same is not disputed by the opponents, we have no hesitation to accept the submission of Ld. Counsel for the opponents.
9. It is further significant to note that though it is alleged by the complainants that the possession of the disputed plot was not given and the opponents created obstruction in the construction, it is fairly conceded by the Ld. Counsel for the complainants that the construction work is already completed by the complainants in the year 2010. Complainant - Manoj Shahre who is present before this Commission has also fairly conceded that the construction on the disputed plot is already completed. Which falsify the complaint itself.
10. For the forgoing reasons, it is obvious that the complaint is not maintainable; the District Consumer Forum has rightly held and dismissed the complaint. Therefore, we find no infirmity or any glaring error in the impugned judgment and order. Hence, no interference is warranted.
11. In the result the appeal, is being devoid of any merit, deserves to be dismissed with cost. Hence, the following order..
ORDER Appeal is dismissed with cost.
Dated:- 06/07/2012 [ Hon'ble Mr.S.M. Shembole] PRESIDING MEMBER [ HON'BLE SMT.JAYSHREE YENGAL] MEMBER [ HON'BLE MR.N. ARUMUGAM] MEMBER ay