State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Ms. Poonam Manshani vs M/S Ferrous Infrastructure Private ... on 12 September, 2014
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION HARYANA, PANCHKULA Execution Application No : 09 of 2013 Date of Institution: 22.08.2013 Date of Decision : 12.09.2014 Ms. Poonam Manshani d/o late Shri N.S. Manshani, A-5C/28-A, Janakpuri, New Delhi-110058. Petitioner-Complainant Versus 1. M/s Ferrous Infrastructure Private Limited, through its Director/competent Person/Competent Authority, Regd. Office at: R-13, Greater Kailash-1, New Delhi-110048. And also at: First Floor, Block-B, Vatika Towers, Golf Course Road, Sector-54, Gurgaon-122002 (Haryana) 2. The AIIMS, (Mangal Murti) Welfare Organization, through its Secretary/Competent Person, Regd. Office at: JC/20, FF Block, Khirki Extn. New Delhi-110017. Respondents-Opposite Parties CORAM: Honble Mr. Justice Nawab Singh, President. Shri B.M. Bedi, Judicial Member. Shri Diwan Singh Chauhan, Member Present: Ms. Ramandeep Kaur, Advocate proxy for Mrs. Ritam Aggarwal, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. Sourabh Goel, Advocate for respondent No.1. O R D E R
B.M. BEDI, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
This execution application has been filed by the petitioner-complainant to execute the order dated November 27th, 2012 passed by this Commission in Complaint No.15 of 2012 filed by petitioner-complainant Poonam Manshani. The operative part of the order is as under:-
..we accept this complaint and issue direction to the opposite parties to allot a flat to the complainant on the same price and same terms and conditions as stipulated in Flat Buyer Agreement (Annexure C-2). The complainant would pay the balance price of the flat alongwith interest as per agreement. The complainant is further awarded compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lacs) on account of un-necessarily harassment and mental agony at the hands of the opposite parties. The litigation expenses is assessed at Rs.11,000/-.
2. Respondents-Opposite Parties preferred First Appeal No.318 of 2013 before Honble National Commission.
3. Vide order dated January 27th, 2014, the order dated November 27th, 2012 passed by this Commission was stayed as under:-
Notice returnable for 1st May 2014.
In the meantime, appellant shall maintain status quo in relation to the nature, title and possession of Flat No. Ground Floor, T-2-26, as it exists today.
Operation of the impugned order shall remain stayed in the meantime.
Order dasti.
4. Vide order dated August 11th, 2014, passed by Honble National Commission, the stay order dated January 27th, 2014 was made absolute, as under:-
Despite service no one appears for the contesting respondent No.1. Under the circumstances, we admit the appeal. List in due course. Interim order dated 27.01.2014 is made absolute.
5. In view of the orders of Honble National Commission, the execution application is dismissed as unsatisfied. File be consigned to records with liberty to the petitioner-complainant to file fresh execution application in terms of the order passed by Honble National Commission.
Announced 12.09.2014 (Diwan Singh Chauhan) Member (B.M. Bedi) Judicial Member (Nawab Singh) President CL