State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Anantha Bhagawan vs The Commissioner & Secretary, Muda on 11 October, 2022
1
Appeal No.1033/2017
Date of filing: 25.04.2017
Date of disposal: 11.10.2022
BEFORE THE KARNATAKA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES
REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BENGALURU (PRINCIPAL BENCH)
DATED:11.10.2022
PRESENT
Mr.K.B SANGANNANAVAR : JUDICIAL MEMBER
Mrs. DIVYASHREE M : LADY MEMBER
APPEAL NO.1033/2017
Sri.Anantha Bhagawan,
S/o Late Anantha Raj V.K,
No.328, Vasavamba Krupa,
N.S Road,
Mysore. .....Appellant/s
(Advocate - Sri.P.C Ponnappa)
V/s
1) The Commissioner and Secretary,
MUDA, JLB Road,
Mysore - 570001.
2) The Secretary,
Urban Development Ministry,
Vikasa Soudha,
Bangalore - 1. .....Respondent/s
(Advocate for R-1 - Sri.T.P Vivekananda)
2
Appeal No.1033/2017
ORDER
Mr.K.B SANGANNANAVAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER This is an Appeal filed U/s.15 of C.P Act, 1986 by the complainant in CC No.1161/2016 on the file of Additional Bench District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Mysore aggrieved by the order dated 27.03.2017.
2. The Commission examined grounds of Appeal, impugned order and heard learned counsel for Appellant/complainant.
3. Learned counsel submits that, the Forum committed gross error in not considering the materials placed by complainant. The Forum below failed to formulate proper points for consideration thereby dismissed the complaint without recording sound reasons.
4. Learned counsel submits that Rs.16,19,000/- is still held by OP-1 and the Forum below held action of the OP cannot be termed as deficiency in service on their part, which in our view is contrary to facts and law. Admittedly complainant sought for allotment of site measuring 15x24 mt. for a consideration of Rs.16,19,000/-. It is not in dispute as found from Appeal papers Rs.1,61,900/- was paid and thereafter according to Appellant/complainant Rs.14,57,100/- was paid on 02.03.2013. Learned counsel for the Appellant/complainant submits that, OP- 1/Respondent manipulated the date of payment of such amount which was not at all considered by Forum below. Complainant 3 Appeal No.1033/2017 alleged against OP as per Sec.19(1) KUD Rule 1991. OP has failed to comply and have violated the said rule resulting in cancellation of allotment of site. No doubt 90+30 equivalent to 120 days allowed for deposit of amount agreed to be paid by complainant, whether it was paid well within 120 days or paid as on 02.03.2013 was not at all examined by Forum below. In such circumstances, in our view the Forum below has to be held committed gross error in dismissing the complaint, ignoring the huge amount withheld by OP-1 is one aspect and the other would be failed to formulate proper points for consideration to appreciate the case of the complainant. In other word the Forum below casually dismissed the complaint which has to be held not only arbitrary, perverse and contrary to law is liable to be set aside. Accordingly, Commission proceeds to allow the Appeal. Consequently set aside the impugned order dated 27.03.2017 passed in CC No.1161/2016 on the file of Additional Bench District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Mysore with a direction to readmit the case and decide the case keeping in mind the object of CPA affording opportunity to both parties as early as possible not later than three months from the date of receipt of order.
5. Provide copy of this order to the District Commission as well as parties to the appeal.
LADY MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER vln*