JUDGMENT

SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA, J.

1. Leave granted.

2. This present petition is arising out of order dated 29.03.2023 passed by National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (for short, “the National Commission”) in Revision Petition No. 2808 of 2018 whereby the National Commission directed the appellant to handover possession of the plot in question to the respondent within three weeks from the date the amount is paid along with interest to the Indore Development Authority.

3. The undisputed facts of the case reveal that the appellant i.e. Indore Development Authority which is an authority constituted under the Town and Country Planning Act, 1973, issued an advertisement/Notice Inviting Tender (NIT) on 05.10.1994 in respect of Scheme No. 54 offering various plots to the public at large. The respondent pursuant to the said advertisement/tender notice dated 05.10.1994 submitted his offer and was allotted a Plot No. 314 on 02.01.1995 in Scheme No. 54 with a payment plan to deposit 50% premium amount and lease rent within 30 days from the date of allotment and the rest 50% was required to be deposited in 12 quarterly instalments. The undisputed facts further reveal that the respondent deposited the initial amount and did not deposit the balance instalments on time and, therefore, as per the terms and conditions of the allotment and rules of the authority, the allotment was cancelled on 22.03.2000.

4. The respondent being aggrieved by the cancellation of allotment preferred a Writ Petition No. 174 of 2001 before the Indore Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court and the Indore Bench of that High Court vide order dated 01.08.2006 passed in Writ Petition No. 174 of 2001 allowed the writ petition thereby directing the Indore Development Authority i.e. the appellant herein to deliver the possession of the plot to the writ petitioner i.e. respondent herein subject to payment of the remaining outstanding amount within 30 days from the date of the order, meaning thereby, the allotment of the respondent was restored and 30 days’ time was granted to him to pay the outstanding dues.

5. The respondent pursuant to the order passed by the High Court submitted a Demand Draft amounting to Rs 5,72,782/-, though the total outstanding amount was Rs. 12,02,592/-. The Demand Draft was returned to the respondent as it was not in respect of the total outstanding amount. According to the respondent, in response to his letter dated 18.06.2008 whereby he requested the appellant to reduce the interest and therefore, based upon his request, the amount was reduced to Rs. 11,04,948/- by the appellant, which was required to be deposited on or before 28.02.2009. The respondent, even though the amount was reduced, failed to deposit the amount of Rs. 11,04,948/- and took a different route for redressal of his grievance by approaching District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Indore, (hereinafter referred to as, “District Forum”) by filing a consumer complaint No. 391/2009 under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, challenging the demand dated 17.02.2009 and for issuance of an appropriate direction for execution of sale deed in his favour and the District Forum vide order dated 25.02.2015 dismissed the complaint on the ground that the amount was not deposited as directed by the High Court.

6. The respondent being aggrieved by the order passed by the District Forum preferred another writ petition No. 1661/2015 before the Indore Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court and the said writ petition was dismissed as withdrawn on 08.04.2015 with the liberty to avail the statutory remedy provided under the Consumer Protection Act. Thereafter, the respondent preferred an appeal before the Madhya Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Bhopal (hereinafter referred to as, “State Commission”). The State Commission admitted the appeal and during the pendency of the appeal, the respondent filed an application under Section 13(3B) of the Consumer Protection