IMPORTANT POINTS
(1) Once Appellant/Complainant, through his Counsel, had given up prayer in complaint qua 12% interest on amt. of Rs.99,883/-, during the course of arguments, now in appeal, Appellant cannot seek the said relief.
(2) Compensation is always commensurate with the amt. of claim and prayer clauses in the complaint as well as appeal asking for exorbitant compensation of Rs.1 Lakh and Rs.33,000/- for litigation expenses and 12% interest exposes intent to abuse the process of law for unjust enrichment.

JUDGMENT

Rajesh K. Arya, Member.—This appeal has been filed by the complainant, namely, Sh. Pritam Dass (appellant herein) seeking modification of order dated 22.02.2021 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-II, U.T., Chandigarh (now District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-II, U.T., Chandigarh) [in short ‘District Commission’] vide which his consumer complaint No.68 of 2020 was allowed and opposite parties No.1 & 2 (respondents No.1 & 2 herein) were directed to pay Rs.7,500/- to the complainant on account of compensation for mental agony and physical harassment as well as litigation expenses within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of the order failing which, they were made liable to pay interest @9% per annum on the awarded amount from the date of the order till payment.

2. It may be stated here that in this appeal, the appellant/complainant has sought enhancement of awarded amount by the District Commission vide the order under challenge. Firstly, the appellant has sought interest @12% on the amount of Rs.99,883/- from 27.12.2018 till January 2021; secondly, he has sought compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation towards harassment, mental tension faced by him on account of arbitrary attitude of respondents No.1 & 2 and thirdly, litigation expenses of Rs.33,000/- has been claimed by him. Enhancement has been sought on the ground that the treatment of the appellant started on 27.12.2018 and he spent the amount in hospital in the year 2018 but respondents No.1 & 2 paid the claim amount in the month of January & February, 2021 i.e. after three years from the date of treatment and withheld the claim amount without any reason.

3. The claim in appeal was contested by respondents No.1 & 2, by filing written arguments, on the ground that claim has been fully satisfied and this fact is admitted in the impugned order. It was further stated that in the absence of any claim against the opposite parties regarding injury or loss, the appeal is not maintainable and is not legally tenable. It was further stated that as per Section 39 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019, it is entirely the discretion of the District Commission to award adequate cost and the appellant cannot challenge the order as being legally untenable, which has been passed after due consideration taking cognizance of the pleadings of the parties and documentary evidence on record. It was further stated that the compensation is always commensurate with the amount of claim and the prayer clauses in the complaint as well as appeal asking for exorbitant compensation of Rs.1 Lakh and Rs.33,000/- for litigation expenses and 12% interest exposes the intent to abuse the process of law for unjust enrichment. Lastly, prayer for dismissal of the appeal has been made.

4. We have also heard the Counsel for the parties and have also gone through the record and written arguments carefully.

5. So far as the claim of the appellant qua interest @12% per annum on the amount of Rs.99,883/- is concerned, it is very much clear from perusal of order dated 29.01.2021 passed by the District Commission in Consumer Complaint No.68 of 2020 that on the said date, Counsel for the complainant admitted that the complainant had received the amount of Rs.1,09,854/- and he contested his claim qua compensation and costs only. This contention of the Counsel for the complainant was also recorded by the District Commission in Para No.5 of its order. Therefore, once the appellant/complainant, through his Counsel, had given up his prayer in the complaint qua 12% interest on the amount of Rs.99,883/-, during the course of arguments, now in appeal, he cannot seek the said relief. Moreover, both of his claims i.e. (Rs.84,914/- + Rs.15,330/-), amounting to Rs.1,00,244/- (wrongly claimed as Rs.99,883/-) were duly paid by respondents No.1 & 2 by making payment of Rs.95,998/- on 17.11.2020 to opposite party No.3. Not only this, it is on record, that respondents No.1 & 2 did not deny the c