State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Amritsar Improvement Trust vs Inderjit Bhatia on 12 December, 2019
FIRST ADDITIONAL BENCH
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,
PUNJAB, CHANDIGARH
First Appeal No.254 of 2019
Date of Institution : 02.05.2019
Date of Reserve : 22.11.2019
Date of Decision : 12.12.2019
Amritsar Improvement Trust, through its Chairman.
....Appellant/opposite party
Versus
Inderjit Bhatia son of Sh.Mehal Chand R/o 434, Urban Estate,
Phase-II, Dugri Ludhiana 9872880907
.....Respondent/complainant
First Appeal against the order dated
20.03.2019 of the District Consumer
Disputes Redressal Forum, Amritsar
Quorum:-
Mr. Rajinder Kumar Goyal, Presiding Member
Present:-
For the appellant : Ms.Kavita Arora, Advocate
For the respondent : Sh.Inderjit Bhatia, In person.
RAJINDER KUMAR GOYAL, PRESIDING MEMBER
ORDER
The instant appeal has been filed by the appellant/opposite party against the order dated 20.03.2019 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Amritsar (in short, 'District Forum'), whereby an application filed by the applicant/complainant was disposed off with the direction to the opposite party to refund the amount of Rs.2,13,453/- to the applicant immediately within a period of 15 days of receiving the certified copy of the order. First Appeal No 254 of 2019 2
It would be apposite to mention that hereinafter the parties will be referred, as have been arrayed before the District Forum.
2. Brief facts, as averred in the application filed by the complainant are that a sum of Rs.1,94,667/- is due from Amritsar Improvement Trust in regard to the payments made regarding Plot No.725-B in Guru Teg Bahadur Nagar, Mall Mandi Scheme, Amritsar in compliance of the orders of the Hon'ble National Commission. The calculations were also mentioned in the application filed before the District Forum. It was further averred that as per the calculation sheets annexed as Annexure A column 5 clearly mention that a sum of Rs.3,12,707/- is due from the opposite party since 05.10.2016 and the opposite party is required to pay the interest at the rate of 12% per annum on surplus amount. However, the order dated 07.05.2018 is silent about surplus amount already agreed upon by the Hon'ble Court and while deciding the complaint the District Forum miscalculated the amount and thus Rs.1,94,667/- is due against the opposite party. The District Forum has omitted a sum of Rs.1,65,000/- which was deposited by the applicant on 31.01.2009 at the time of application to the Trust vide application No.014864. Finally the complainant / applicant prayed that the directions regarding the surplus amount paid by the complainant to the opposite parties be given for its immediate refund.
3. Upon notice, the representative of opposite party appeared before the District Forum and filed its calculation sheet. Thereafter, First Appeal No 254 of 2019 3 the District Forum decided to get the expertise report in this matter and with the consent of Sh.Jatinder Nagpal, Advocate, he was asked to give his view. Sh.Jatinder Nagpal, Advocate has submitted his report and then the application was disposed of with the above directions.
4. The District Forum, after going through the report of the expert and hearing both the parties disposed of the application, vide impugned order. Hence, this appeal is by the appellants/opposite parties.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the appellant and respondent, appeared in person, and have carefully gone through the records of the case.
6. Learned counsel for the appellant/opposite party argued that the District Forum illegally without any powers and jurisdiction reviewed its own order dated 07.05.2018 passed in EA No.9 of 2018. The District Forum has passed the order against the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The District Forum has no power to review its own order. It is prayed to allow the appeal and the impugned order dated 20.03.2019 passed by the District Forum, Amritsar be set aside.
7. On the other hand, the respondent/complainant has appeared, in person, and argued that the Hon'ble National Commission in its order dated 24.11.2017 had found the opposite parties deficient in rendering services. The District Forum inadvertently miscalculated the amount and passed the correct First Appeal No 254 of 2019 4 order in favour of the respondent/complainant in the application filed by the respondent/complainant. There is no illegality or infirmity in the order passed by the District Forum. It is prayed to dismiss the appeal being devoid of merits.
8. Briefly the respondent/complainant applied for allotment of 250 sq. yards plot and deposited Earnest Money Deposit amounting to Rs.1,65,000/- on 30.01.2009. In the draw of lots, the respondent/complainant was not successful and was at Sr.No.1 of waiting list of unsuccessful aspirants. Due to surrender of allotment by one Smt. Harjit Kaur the respondent/complainant requested the appellant for allotment of Plot No.117-B surrendered by above said allottee. The respondent/complainant filed a CWP No.8131 of 2013 before the Hon'ble High Court, which was disposed of with a direction to the appellant/opposite party to consider the claim of the petitioner by passing a speaking order within a period of three months considering the case of the respondent/complainant the appellant/opposite party allotted Plot No.117-B, measuring 250 sq. yards @ Rs.9,600/- per sq.yards.
9. The respondent/complainant filed a consumer complaint in District Forum with the prayer to charge the price at the rate of Rs.6,660/- per sq. yards and to charge interest at the rate of 10% on balance 75% instalments, which was dismissed. The respondent/ complainant filed an appeal before the State Commission which was allowed on 28.02.2017 with the following order:
First Appeal No 254 of 2019 5
"i) The opposite party is directed to charge the cost @6600/- per square yard and cess @4%. However, on the instalment OP will be entitled to charge interest @12% at present.
The complainant will not be entitled to any compensation as plot has been ordered to be allotted on old rate. However, he will be entitled to litigation expenses of Rs.11,000/-"
10. The appellant/opposite party challenged the order of the State Commission before the Hon'ble National Commission by filing a revision petition which was disposed of with the following direction vide order dated 24.11.2017:-
"i) The complainant shall pay interest @10% per annum on the principal amount including cess deposited by him pursuant to the allotment letter dated 06.04.2015. The interest would be payable with effect from 22.01.2010 when Smt. Harjit Kaur sought to surrender the plot allotted to her, till the date on which the above referred principal amount was actually deposited.
ii) The complainant shall be liable to pay the price of the plot at the rate prevailing on 22.01.2010 when Smt. Harjit Kaur sought to surrender the plot which had been allotted to her.
iii) In the facts and circumstances of the case there shall be no order as to costs."
11. After this the respondent/complainant filed execution application No.09 of 2018 dated 10.01.2018 under Section 25 and 27 in the District Forum, Amritsar, wherein calculation sheets were submitted by both the parties. After going through the calculation First Appeal No 254 of 2019 6 sheets the District Forum passed the following order dated 07.05.2018.
"After going through the order passed by the Hon'ble National Commission, we have perused the calculation sheets produced by both the parties and came to the conclusion that the J.D./opposite party has correctly complied with the order of the Hon'ble National Commission by charging the interest @10% for the period from 22.01.2010 to 04.05.2015 and nothing found payable to the DH by the J.D. The execution application as such is hereby disposed off. Copies of this order be sent to the parties free of cost and thereafter the file be consigned to record room."
12. Again the respondent/complainant filed a Misc/Review Application No.14 of 2018 dated 04.06.2018 stating that the order dated 07.05.2018 is silent about the surplus amount which had already been agreed upon by the Hon'ble Court during the various hearings and further stated that some miscalculation or misrepresentation has taken place while giving the decision on 07.05.2018 that nothing is found payable to Decree Holder by the Judgment Debtor. The District Forum after hearing the parties reviewed its order dated 07.05.2018 and passed the order dated 20.03.2019 as under:-
"In view of the above discussion, the misc. application disposed off with the direction to the opposite party to refund the amount of Rs.2,13,453/- to the applicant immediately on receiving this order within a period of 15 days. Opposite party is also directed to do the needful regarding the First Appeal No 254 of 2019 7 registration of plot in the Name of Applicant within a period of 30 days as the Appellant has made full payment of the plot."
13. Now the issue is to decide whether the District Forum was empowered to review its own order dated 07.05.2018 or not? Once it was mentioned in the order dated 07.05.2018 that nothing found payable to the decree holder by the JD and there is no fresh order for enhancement or otherwise by the Hon'ble National Commission after 07.05.2018. The District Forum cannot review its own order passed on dated 07.05.2018. In view of the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in 2011(9) SCC 541 titled Rajeev Hitendra Pathak and Others Vs. Achyut Kashinath Karekar and Anr. and another judgment reported in 2015(11) SCC 661 titled Kamlesh Aggarwal Vs. Narain Singh Dabbas and anr. wherein the District Forum as well as State Commission have not been given powers to review its own order.
14. Sequel to the above discussions, the appeal filed by the appellant is allowed and the impugned order passed by the District Forum in application bearing M.A. No.14 of 2018 is set aside. The complainant is also given liberty to file an appeal.
15. The appellant/opposite party had deposited a sum of Rs.25,000/- at the time of filing of the appeal. It deposited another amount of Rs.1,24,417/- in compliance of the order dated 17.05.2019. Both these sums, along with interest which has accrued thereon, if any, shall be remitted by the Registry to the First Appeal No 254 of 2019 8 appellant/opposite party, after the expiry of 45 days of the sending of certified copy of the order to them.
16. Arguments in this appeal were heard on 22.11.2019 and the order was reserved. The certified copies of the orders be communicated to the parties, as per rules.
(RAJINDER KUMAR GOYAL) PRESIDING MEMBER December 12th ,2019 parmod