State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Mr. Vikas Sabharwal vs M/S M-Tech Developers Ltd. on 2 July, 2015
Daily Order IN THE STATE COMMISSION : DELHI (Constituted under Section 9 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986) Date of Decision :2.7.2015 First Appeal No.505/14 Mr. Vikash Sabharwal S/o Sh. Prem Chand Sabharwal House No.1837 Sector-4, Gurgaon, Haryana. ......Appellant Versus M/s. M. Tech. Developers Ltd., Through its Director Mr. Mahinder Sharma E-156, Greater Kailash-I New Delhi-48 Also at: M/s. M. Tech. Developers Ltd., Through its Director ANS House LGF, 144/2 Ashram Mathura Road, New Delhi-110 014 ....Respondent CORAM Justice Veena Birbal, President Salma Noor, Member
1. Whether reporters of local newspaper be allowed to see the judgment?
2. To be referred to the reporter or not?
Justice Veena Birbal, President In this appeal, challenge has been made to order dated 4.3.2014 passed by the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum by which the following relief has been given to the appellant/complaint by the District Forum:-
"In view of the above, we allow the complaint and direct the OP to refund the amount of Rs.2,25,000/- taken for the purpose of flat from the complainant and also to refund the amount of Rs.1,60,000/- the amount taken for the plot 160 yds from the complainant making a total amount of Rs.3,85,000/- alongwith simple interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing of the complaint till realisation of the said amount. In addition we direction the OP to pay a sum of Rs.7,000/- (Rs. Seven Thousand) as cost of litigation to the complainant and also a sum of Rs.40,000/- (Rs. Forty Thousand) towards mental agony and harassment of the complainant on account of the transaction in question."
The grievance of appellant is that the interest on deposited amount ought to have been awarded by the District Forum from the date of deposit.
On the other hand the stand of the respondent is that the impugned order is correct and does not call for any interference.
After some arguments Ld. Counsel for the respondent has stated that he has taken instructions from the respondent for settling the matter with appellant/complainant. It is stated that respondent has no objection in giving the interest to the appellant/complainant on the amount deposited @6% from the date of deposit instead of date of filing the complaint as is ordered by the Ld. District Forum, provided the appellant/complainant gives up compensation amount as awarded by the Ld. District Forum and litigation amount be also reduced.
Ld. Counsel for the appellant has stated that the appellant has no objection if the impugned order is modified as per statement made by the Counsel for the respondent.
In view of the settlement between the parties as per statements of the Ld. Counsel for the parties, the impugned order stands modified. The respondent/OP is directed to refund the amount of Rs.2,25,000/- taken for the purpose of flat alongwith interest @6% per annum from the date of deposit till realisation. The respondent/OP shall also refund the amount of Rs.1,60,000/- the amount taken for the plot 160 yds from the appellant/complainant making a total amount of Rs.3,85,000/- alongwith simple interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of deposit till realisation of the said amount. As agreed between the parties, the appellant/complainant shall not be entitled for any compensation and the litigation expenses are also reduced from Rs. 7,000/- to Rs. 5,000/-.
Ld. Counsel for the respondent prays five months time for making the payments. However, we are granting three months time from today for making the payment.
Appeal stands disposed of in terms of settlement between the parties.
The FDR deposited by the appellant/OP before this Commission be released to them after completion of due formalities.
A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties free of charge and also to the concerned District Forum.
File be consigned to Record Room.
(Justice Veena Birbal) President (Salma Noor) Member ak