M.M. Developers And Promoters Pvt. Ltd. vs VINOD KUMAR

THIS revision petition has been filed by the petitioner against the order dated 27 -01 -2011 passed by State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Delhi (in short, ''the State Commission '') in Appeal No. 790/2008 - M.M. Developers & Promoters Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Anand Prakash Adlakha and appeal no. 237/2008 - Anand Prakash Adlakha Vs. M.M. Developers and Promoters Pvt. Ltd. by which while dismissing appeal no. 790/2008, appeal no. 237/2008 was allowed and compensation was enhanced from Rs. 25,000/ - to Rs. 1 lakh against which this revision petition has been filed.

BRIEF facts of the case are that complainant purchased office unit no. 204 from opposite party vide agreement dated 07 -02 -2005. Complainant found that there was continuous leakage at various places in public toilets of 2nd and 3rd floor resulting in seepage on all the walls, roof of complainant ''s office and furniture of office was also damaged. It was further alleged that on account of sub -standard material used in the construction of building loss was caused. Complainant requested opposite party for repairs but in vain. Alleging deficiency on the part of opposite party, complainant filed complaint before District Forum. Opposite party resisted complaint and denied leakage or seepage and use of sub -standard material in construction and further submitted that all toilets were in proper running condition and prayed for dismissal of complaint. Learned District Forum, after hearing both the parties, allowed complaint and directed opposite party to repair the toilets, walls, floor and roof of complainant ''s office and further to pay Rs.25,000/ - as compensation including litigation cost. Both parties filed appeal before State Commission and learned State Commission vide order dated 27.02.2009 enhanced compensation from Rs.25,000/ - to Rs. 1 lakh. Opposite party -petitioner filed revision petition before this Commission and this Commission vide order dated 26 -02 -2010 set aside order of State Commission and remanded matter back to State Commission for fresh decision in accordance with law. Learned State Commission vide impugned order again after some discussion, upheld previous order, against which this revision petition has been filed. Heard learned counsel for the parties finally at admission stage and perused record.

LEARNED counsel for the petitioner submitted that learned State Commission has not dealt with his appeal at all and contrary to that enhanced compensation in another appeal without any basis, hence revision petition be allowed and impugned order be set aside and matter may be remanded back to learned State Commission. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent submitted that leaned State Commission rightly enhanced compensation and order passed by learned State Commission is in accordance with law, hence revision petition be dismissed.

IT is not disputed that learned District Forum granted compensation of Rs.25,000/ - and both parties challenged that order before State Commission. Learned State Commission vide earlier order, enhanced compensation from Rs.25,000/ - to Rs. 1 Lakh and even after remand by this Commission, learned State Commission vide impugned order upheld previous order passed by State Commission. Perusal of impugned order reveals that it has not considered any grounds taken by petitioner in memo of appeal and has also observed in order that no evidence has been given and no estimates have been furnished by the complainant, even then enhanced compensation from Rs.25,000/ - to Rs. 1 Lakh. As contentions raised by the petitioner in memo of appeal before State Commission have not been considered, it would be appropriate to set aside the impugned order and remand matter back to learned State Commission to decide it afresh in accordance with law. Consequently, revision petition filed by the petitioner is allowed and impugned order dated 27 -01 -2011 passed by learned State Commission in Appeal No. 237/2008 - Anand Prakash Adlakha Vs. M.M. Developers & Promoters Pvt. Ltd. and Appeal No. 790/2008 - M.M. Developers & Promoters Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Anand Prakash Adlakha is set aside and matter is remanded back to learned State Commission to decide it afresh after giving an opportunity of being heard to both the parties and after considering grounds taken by petitioner in memo of appeal before State Commission and it is further expected from State Commission that it will decide appeals expeditiously.

PARTIES are directed to appear before State Commission on 03.11.2014.