Mr. Justice K.K. Srivastava, President—After hearing Mr. C.M. Makkar, Advocate appearing for the appellant and going through the impugned order dated 15.1.2004, we find no infirmity in the impugned order passed by the District Forum-II, U.T., Chandigarh in Complaint Case No. 903 of 2002.

2. The District Forum has directed the respondent not to charge the enhanced price of the flat from the respective complainants. This direction is clearly in consonance with the law laid down by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi [for short hereinafter referred to as the National Commission] in III (2003) CPJ 191 (NC), Chief Administrator, PUDA and Another v. Mrs. Shabnam Virk, decided on 26.8.2003, which reads as under:

“As far as the question of pricing is concerned, normally Consumer Forums do not enter into this area, but when we see the statement filed by PUDA explaining the reasons for price escalation of the house, we find good reason to interfere. Mere perusal of the statement reveals that most of the cost escalation is attributed to cost escalation of land. Reasons for this is given out ‘land rate of Rs. 1,200/- per sq. yd. at the time of advertisement in Aug