State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
James Sebastian vs M/S M2K Infrastructure Pvt. on 15 July, 2022
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
HARYANA, PANCHKULA
Consumer Complaint No.279 of 2018
Date of Institution: 07.05.2018
Date of Decision: 15.07.2022
1. James Sebastian son of A.D. Devasia
2. Mrs. Jancy James wife of James Sebastian, both residents of
House No.330, Sector 9, Housing Board Colony, Dharuhera,
Sub Tehsil Dharuhera, District Rewari.
....Complainants
Versus
1. M/s M2K Infrastructure Private Limited, M2K County, Sector 5,
Dharuhera, Sub Tehsil Dharuhera, District Rewari through its
Authorized Signatory.
2. M/s M2K Infrastructure Private Limited through its Managing
Director, Office E-13/29, Harsha Bhawan, Connaught Circus,
New Delhi.
....Opposite Parties
CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. Justice T.P.S. Mann, President.
Ms. Manjula, Member.
Present: Shri Rohit Goswami, counsel for the complainants.
Complainant No.1-James Sebastian in person
Shri Vikas Sharma, proxy counsel for Shri Manoj
Vashishtha, counsel for the opposite parties.
ORDER
T.P.S. MANN, J. (ORAL) The complainants, namely, James Sebastian and Mrs. Jancy James have filed the present complaint under Section 17 (1)(a)(i) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against M/s M2K Infrastructure Private Limited, M2K County, Sector 5, Dharuhera, Sub Tehsil Dharuhera, District Rewari and M/s M2K Infrastructure Private C.C. No.279 of 2018 Jamesh Sebastian & Anr. Vs. M/s M2K Infrastructure Ltd. 2 Limited through its Managing Director, Office E-13/29, Harsha Bhawan, Connaught Circus, New Delhi-opposite parties wherein they seek issuance of following directions to the opposite parties:-
(i) To handover the possession of Plot No.D-44, M2K County, Sector 5, Dharuhera, District Rewari (Haryana);
(ii) To withdraw the illegal demand raised by the opposite parties vide letter dated 10.08.2013 Ref DH/2013/3145/572 in which opposite parties had raised the demand of Rs.23,31,571/-;
(iii) To pay interest of 18% p.a. on deposited amount by the complainant and to pay rent for 5 years to the tune of Rs.5,60,000/-;
(iv) To pay Rs.1 lac towards mental harassment and mental agony and Rs.51,000/- towards cost of litigation charges;
2. Upon notice, the opposite parties put in appearance and filed their written version. The parties thereafter recorded their evidence and the complaint is now coming up for final arguments for today.
3. Counsel for the complainants states that during the pendency of the complaint, the matter between the parties has been amicably settled and in this regard, settlement deed dated 24.06.2022 has been recorded and a photocopy of the same has been placed on the record. Accordingly, he may be allowed to withdraw the present complaint.
4. Counsel for the opposite parties confirms the factum of compromise having been arrived at between the parties and execution of settlement agreement dated 24.06.2022. He also states C.C. No.279 of 2018 Jamesh Sebastian & Anr. Vs. M/s M2K Infrastructure Ltd. 3 he has no objection if the complainants are permitted to withdraw the complaint.
5. In view of the above, the complaint is hereby dismissed as withdrawn. The parties shall remain bound by the terms and conditions of the settlement agreement arrived at between them.
July 15, 2022 (Manjula) (T.P.S. Mann)
UK
Member President