AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
THIS is an appeal under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter called the ''Act'') against judgment and order dated 6.1.1993 passed by District Consumer Forum, Lucknow in Complaint Case No. 66 of 1991.
INITIALLY a complaint was filed with the allegations that a sum of Rs. 5,206.74 which was deposited as development cost be got refunded and a sum of Rs. 328/- be also awarded as lesser area of plot was allotted than the plot for which total cost was paid. A further sum of Rs. 20,000/- was also requested to be awarded as the complainant had to spend the amount over levelling of the allotted land. It was also requested that the opposite party be directed to provide facility of water, electricity and sewer and a further sum of Rs. 2,000/- be also awarded as he had to spend the same for installing a hand pump. Further a sum of Rs. 30,000/- was also claimed as compensation. Over and above 24% per annum interest was also requested. The learned District Forum, after perusing the evidence came to the conclusion that the only relief of Rs. 328/- along with a sum of Rs. 1,500/- towards compensation for the installation of water facility was to be allowed and the remaining reliefs were rejected.
Aggrieved against the said order, present appeal has been filed.
WE have heard learned Counsels for the parties. The argument of the learned Counsel for the appellant was that there being a difference in development charges found external development charges, charging of Rs. 5,206.74 as external charges was wrong and in not recording such a finding the learned District Forum has committed an error of law. It was further submitted that as there was no agreement for payment of external development charges for being included in the cost of land, it was not within the scope of the learned District Forum to have denied the claim. Even the plea of conditions 5 and 10 of the Annexure No. 1 which are terms and conditions of the allotment do not relate to the development charges. We are not impressed with any of the grounds taken for the reason that in view of terms and condition Nos. 5 and 10 as contained in Annexure 3, the respondent was well within its right to have charged the development charges. Development charge as it envisages contains two types of developments, one the internal development and the other external and any charge which relates to development of the land can well be charged by the opposite party. In the instant case for external development a sum of Rs. 5,206.74 has been charged and in doing so and in justifying such charges, the learned District Forum has committed no error.
THERE is no question of any mental pain occurring on account of it. The order of the District Forum is just and proper and there is no deficiency in service committed by the opposite parties. The appeal fails and accordingly is liable to be dismissed. ORDER The appeal is dismissed. There will be no order as to the costs. Let copy as per rules be made available to the parties. Appeal dismissed.