Tribunals and Commissions(2005) 09 NCDRC CK 0036

NAND LAL vs SANGITA DEVI

National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission · Decided on 19 September 2005 · Citation: 2005 4 CPJ 634

HON’BLE JUDGES
J.D.KAPOOR , RUMNITA MITTAL J.

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

6 paragraphs · 423 words
1.

ADMITTEDLY the appellant received a sum of Rs. 15,500 by way of cheque and cash towards consideration amount of plot No. 230 in Khasra No. 73, measuring 30 sq. yards in Prem Nagar -III, New Delhi. Neither did he refund the amount nor did he hand over the possession of the said flat to the respondent.

2.

VIDE impugned order dated 7.2.2002 passed by the District Forum the appellant has been held guilty for deficiency in service and has been directed to pay Rs. 15,500 along with interest @ 15% w.e.f. 5.12.1999 and also pay Rs. 2,000 as compensation and Rs. 500 as cost of litigation. Feeling aggrieved, the appellant has preferred this appeal taking the plea that the entire amount had been refunded to the husband of the respondent who had given the receipts from time -to -time on the back of the receipt. The appellant has produced certain indorsement on the back of the receipts showing that the respondents husband had received Rs. 1,000 on 15.2.2000, Rs. 1,000 on 14.4.2000, Rs. 1,000 on 15.9.2000, Rs. 1,700 on 15.3.2000. In all the amount refunded by the appellant was Rs. 8,000. However, the respondent has denied these indorsements were ever made by her husband. Since the respondent has not filed affidavit of her husband denying the claim of the appellant that he had refunded the aforesaid amount to him, the indorsement made on the back of the receipts by the husband of the respondent having received total amount of Rs. 8,000 is presumed to be correct.

3.

THE conduct of the appellant in neither refunding the entire amount nor handing over the possession of the flat in question amounts to deficiency in service and, therefore, appellant is liable to compensate the respondent by making the payment of remaining amount as well as damage/compensation for the harassment and mental agony suffered by the respondent.

4.

IN view of the above, we partly allow the appeal by directing the appellant to refund a sum of Rs. 7,500 towards the consideration amount and Rs. 5,000 as compensation for causing harassment and mental agony and the loss respondent suffered at the hands of the appellant. Appeal is disposed of in above terms.

5.

FDR /Bank Guarantee, if any, filed by the appellant be returned after completion of due formalities.

6.

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 and thereafter the file be consigned to Record Room. Appeal allowed.