Tribunals and Commissions(2015) 03 NCDRC CK 0154

R P Pushkar vs GHAZIABAD DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission · Decided on 27 March 2015

HON’BLE JUDGES
K.S.CHAUDHARI 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 · 446 words
1.

THIS revision petition has been filed by the petitioner against the order dated 30.8.2013 passed by the U.P. State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Lucknow (in short, "the State Commission") in Appeal No. 106 of 2012 G.D.A. Vs. R.P. Purshar and Ors. by which, while allowing revision petition, order of District Forum passed in execution proceedings was set aside.

2.

BRIEF facts of the case are that Complainant/Petitioner filed complaint before District forum and District Forum allowed complaint and directed OP/respondent to handover possession of the plot and pay interest and cost. Appeal filed by OP was decided by learned State Commission vide order dated 6.8.2001 by which, OP was directed to pay interest @ 18% p.a. with Rs.2,000/ - as cost. OP filed revision petition before this Commission and this Commission vide order dated 18.3.2011 directed OP to execute lease deed of the plot on completion of due formalities within a period of 4 weeks. As lease deed was not executed within 4 weeks, complainant filed execution petition before District Forum and learned District Forum awarded Rs.25,000/ - as compensation for delayed execution of deed on 9.1.2012. This order was challenged by OP before State Commission and learned State Commission vide impugned order while allowing revision petition set aside compensation of Rs.25,000/ - against which, this revision petition has been filed.

3.

HEARD petitioner in person and perused record. Learned District Forum in order dated 30.4.2012 observed that OP made averment in the reply that as complainant had not completed all the formalities, deed could not be executed earlier. Perusal of order of this Commission makes it very clear that lease deed was to be executed on completion of due formalities within a period of 4 weeks, meaning thereby, after completion of all the formalities by complainant lease deed was to be executed within 4 weeks. Petitioner has not placed any material on record to substantiate that lease deed was not executed within four weeks after completion of all the formalities.

4.

EVEN if it is presumed that lease deed was executed beyond 4 weeks after completion of all the formalities, this Commission has not given any direction for providing compensation if the lease deed is not executed within 4 weeks. In such circumstances, learned District Forum committed error in granting compensation of Rs.25,000/ - and learned State Commission has not committed any error in setting aside aforesaid compensation.

5.

I do not find any illegality, irregularity or jurisdictional error in the impugned order and revision petition is liable to be dismissed at admission stage.

6.

CONSEQUENTLY , revision petition filed by the petitioner is dismissed at admission stage with no order as to costs.