IMPORTANT POINT
Petitioner has to give sufficient cause to condone day to day delay.

Rekha Gupta, Presiding Member—Revision Petition no. 2965 of 2016 has been filed against the judgment dated 29.08.2016 of the Telangana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Hyderabad (‘the State Commission’) in Appeal no. FAIA no. 433 of 2016 in FASR no. 1141 of 2016.

2. The facts of the case as per the respondent/ complainant are that the respondent became a member of the petitioner/ opposite party vide Membership no. 24610. On the instructions of the petitioner, the respondent paid a sum of Rs.10,500/- as initial payment and Rs.100/- towards membership fee. The petitioner after receiving the said initial payment issued a Membership and allotment letter, dated 06.03.2001 in favour of the respondent. The petitioner allotted plot no. 12 admeasuring 310 sq yards in the project namely “East City”, Sector, Extension Block D, situated at Bibinagar, Nalgonda District. The cost of the said plot was Rs.1,33,000/- (the total cost of the said plot was Rs.1,46,630/- - 10% discount given to the defence personnel, i.e., Rs.13,330/-). As per the agreed terms, the respondent was to pay the balance amount of Rs.1,22,800/- in 48 monthly instalment of Rs.2,550/- per month. The last instalment due was on March 2005. The respondent paid the entire amount as agreed to the petitioner by 28.02.2005. The petitioner gave a receipt dated 28.02.2005 in favour of the respondent mentioning that balance due was stated – 0 – (nil Balance).

3. In spite of several visits and demands made by the respondent for registration, the petitioner has failed to execute the sale deed. The respondent retired from service in the month of August 2005. After retirement also the respondent has made several visits to the office of the petitioner and requested for registration of the plot. Instead of executing the sale deed, petitioner through letter, dated 07.03.2007 requested the respondent to pay Rs.31,000/- towards registration charges. After receiving the said letter the respondent addressed a letter dated 24.03.3007 to the petitioner that he required six months’ time to arrange the registration charges, the petitioner received the said letter but did not raise any objection. The respondent paid Rs.31,000/- to the petitioner towards registration charges through banker’s cheque bearing no. 416335 dated 05.01.2008. He also handed over his driving licence, PAN Card, passport size photographs to Sri M Venkateshwarlu, Customer Care in charge for the purpose of registration of sale deed and signed on the relevant documents. The petitioner promised to execute the sale deed within a few days but failed to do so. The respondent then received a letter dated 31.01.2008 from the petitioner requiring him to pay the registration charges. It was also mentioned in the said letter that the petitioner had changed the plot and its location to Sector V, Block ZP, Plot no. 12 (CP) and requested the respondent to pay Rs.87,600/-.

4. The petitioner/ OP while in their reply admitted all facts and stated that some persons claiming themselves as legal heirs of the original land owners had approached the court and obtained stay in respect of the lands in sector extension, Block D, of East City. So the registration could not be done immediately. Therefore, the plots allotted to the members in Block D of extension sector were shifted to Sector V of East City wherein plots were ready for registration and the same was intimated to the respondent through letter dated 04.04.2007 for his consent. The revised statement of account dated 07.04.2007 was also sent to the respondent requesting him to pay the registration charges and other charges to a tune of Rs.54,250/-. The respondent had not responded to the said letter. However, he sent a Banker’s Cheque for Rs.31,000/- on 05.01.2008. As the respondent did not give any reply about the shifting of the plot in Sector IV, it was taken as a deemed consent of the respondent and as such the petitioner has sent a revised statement of account adjustin