AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
ONE of the opposite parties is the petitioner before us. First respondent is the complainant. Complaint was that she had paid the price of the plot, registration charges and got the sale deed registered in respect of the land promoted by the petitioner and other co-opposite parties. She could not build on the plot of land as layout had not been sanctioned by the Agra Development Authority and she had been taken for a ride. District Forum allowed the complaint and directed return of the amount paid towards price of the land plus registration and other charges for executing sale deed by the opposite parties in favour of the complainant.
ON appeal filed by the opposite parties before the State Commission, the order of the District Forum was modified to the extent that after the refund of the money and charges for execution of sale deed, complainant shall also, in turn, surrender the sale deed and for that all charges were to be borne by the opposite parties. State Commission passed the following order : "The appeal is dismissed. It is hereby directed that the opposite parties/ appellants shall jointly and severally refund to the complainant a sum of Rs. 53,920/- along with interest at the rate of 18% per annum from the date of respective deposits till the date of payment. The appellant shall also pay to the complainant an amount of Rs. 5,000/- as compensation for harassment and mental torture. In addition, the complainant shall also pay to the complainant an amount of Rs. 11,690/- along with registration and miscellaneous charges paid by her, subject to the condition that she shall surrender the sale deed in favour of the appellants and for doing so the charges will be met by the appellants. The order of the learned District Forum is, therefore, modified accordingly. The appellants shall also pay to the complainant Rs. 2,000/- as cost of proceedings in the appeal. Let compliance of this order be made within a period of two months from the date of this order."
We do not think it is a fit case for us to exercise our jurisdiction under Clause (b) of Section 21 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. Revision petition is dismissed. Revision Petition dismissed. ______________