IMPORTANT POINT
A consumer is entitled to relief of equity only if he does equity.

N.P. Kaushik, Judicial Member—Present appeal is directed against the orders dated 27.04.2010 passed by the Ld. District Forum VI New Delhi. Vide impugned orders Ld. District Forum passed the following directions against the OP/appellant herein i.e. M/s Parsvnath Developers Ltd. 19 Barakhamba Road New Delhi:

“1. OP will get registered the property in the name of the complainant and also bear the cost of additional expenditure if any without taking any charges from the complainant.

2. OP will pay Rs. 1,00,000/- to the complainant on account of compensation towards mental agony and harassment.

3. OP will pay Rs. 10,000/- to the complainant towards litigation cost.”

2. Admittedly the complainant Lt. Col. Ajay Kumar booked a shop bearing no. SF 14 Bibhab Plaza Greater Noida in June 2005.After making complete payment towards sale consideration, the complainant submitted stamp papers to the OP/appellant for execution of the sale deed on 28.06.2006. It is also the admitted case of the parties that the property in question was handed over to the complainant on 28.06.2006. Complainant did not hear anything from the OP. Vide its letter dated 06.09.2006, the complainant enquired from the OP the status of his case. OP vide its letter dated 27.09.2006 informed the complainant that there was a hike in the stamp duty and for that purpose complainant was asked to purchase fresh stamp papers of the value of Rs. 39,200/-. Before proceedings further, it may be mentioned here that the aforesaid hike in the revenue duty took place on 01.07.2006. Complainant vide its letter dated 21.10.2006 informed the OP that the delay in execution of the sale deed was on his part and asked the OP to pay the deficit stamp duty. OP vide its letter dated 11.11.2006 again demanded the additional stamp duty of Rs. 39,200/-.

3. Complainant filed the complaint bearing no. 530/2007 in District Forum VI in the month of June 2007. It was filed through the counsel Sh. Muneesh Kumar Sharma Advocate. Written version in the said complaint was filed by the OP/appellant herein on 08.02.2008. In the said written version OP raised an objection to the effect that the complainant had purchased property for commercial purposes and for that reason ‘consumer complaint’ was not maintainable. OP also submitted that the sale deed of the property in question stood executed on 23.11.2007. OP also placed on record a photocopy of the sale deed in question. The complaint i.e. complaint bearing no. 530/2007 was dismissed in default on 10.12.2008.

4. Complainant filed another complaint in District Forum VI New Delhi on 19.01.2010 bearing no. 53/2010. Complainant referred to the correspondence between the parties that took place uptil 11.11.2006. Vide this letter OP had asked the complainant to pay the additional stamp duty of Rs. 39,200/-. Complainant in his second complaint submitted that his counsel did not inform him of the status of his earlier complaint till December 2008. His counsel however told him that he was suffering from high blood pressure and for that reason forgot the matter in question. Complainant thereafter discovered that his complaint stood dismissed in default on 10.12.2008. Prayer made by the complainant in the second complaint is reproduced below:

“1. Direct the OP to get register the property in the name of the complainant forthwith and also bear the cost of additional expenditure, if any, without taking any extra charges from the complainant.

2. Direct the Opposite Party to pay a sum of 300000/- as compensation to the complainant for mental agony and harassment caused to the complainant.

3. Direct the Opposite Party to pay a sum of Rs. 50,000/- as cost and litigation expenses.

4. Pass any other order that this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.”

5. Ld. District Forum vide its orders dated 03.03.2010 proceeded against the OP/appellant herein ex-parte on the grounds that the OP had refused to accept the service. Notice fo