Back
R. K. AGRAWAL, S. M. KANTIKAR
C. Prakash – Appellant
Versus
R. Gunasekaran – Respondent
ORDER
R.K. Agrawal, President—This Revision Petition, under Section 21(b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to the Act), has been filed by C. Prakash, the sole Opposite Party in the Complaint under the Act (hereinafter referred to as the Petitioner), against the Order dated 22.04.2015, passed by the Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission at Chennai (hereinafter referred to as the State Commission) in First Appeal No. 211 of 2013, whereby the State Commission while setting aside the Order dated 22.01.2013, passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Coimbatore (hereinafter referred to as the District Commission), partly allowed the Appeal, preferred by the Complainant, the Respondent herein, and directed the Petitioner herein to pay a sum of Rs.15,66,730/- with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing of the Complaint (viz. 04.05.2010) till realization towards compensation for the defective construction of the building and the deficiency in service on the part of the Petitioner and to pay a sum of Rs.25,000/- as compensation for mental agony and Rs.5,000/- as litigation costs. By its Order dated 22.01.2
Stamp duty/tax evasion - As far as the plea of the Petitioner relating to stamp duty/tax evasion is concerned, Consumer Fora is not supposed to go into the said question and, therefore, the stated pl....
The court affirmed that housing construction agreements fall under the Consumer Protection Act, establishing that both parties were bound by the definitions of 'consumer' and 'service'.
Allotment of flat – Collection of excessive amount – Defects in flat – Deficiency in service.
The National Commission emphasized its limited revisional jurisdiction, requiring clear jurisdictional errors for interfering with concurrent findings of fact from lower forums.
The court affirmed that ownership transfer must occur before financial obligations arise, and established consumer rights based on livelihood motivations in property transactions.
An unregistered agreement does not invalidate a consumer complaint; service of notice is deemed valid under the applicable law, and the appropriate legal remedy is an appeal, not a revision.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
