ORDER

A.Z. Khwaja, Judicial Member—Complainant – Dr. Ramprakash Mishra has preferred the present complaint under Section12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 alleging deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice on behalf of the O.P. No.1- M/s. Ganeshanand Builders and Developers as well as others.

2. Short facts leading to the filing of the present complaint may be stated as under:—

Complainant – Dr. Ramprakash Mishra claims to be a medical practitioner and was running his clinic admeasuring about 400 Sq. fts. at Raghunath Nagar which was located in Raj Narayan Mahavir Pathak Chawl, Wagale Estate since last 15 to 16 years. Complainant has contended that his clinic premises was a commercial establishment and was very well furnished. Complainant has claimed that he was having huge medical practice and was also enjoying reputation and honour in the Society in the entire area and was also attached to the various Hospitals and Nursing Homes. The complainant was also active in social welfare activities and was also connected with the social organizations. The complainant has contended that he was looking after his wife and children on the basis of the earning from his clinic. In the year 2002 the O.P. No. 1- M/s. Ganeshanand Builders and Developers came forward to develop the entire property which consisted of several slum dwellers. The complainant has contended that Raghunath Nagar area was consisting of Chawl as well as Kachha and Pakka independent structure. O.P.No. 1 Organized series of General Body Meeting with the residents/Chawl Owners and tenants including complainant and gave a proposal to develop the area consisting of plot Nos. 147 and 148 owned by original owner Shri Himanshu/ Ashok Joshi and others. The complainant has contended that the project was to be known as New Anand Park. The O.P.No. 1- Ganeshanand Builders and Developers also executed several agreements with the tenants and Chawl Owners. O.P. No. 1 has promised the tenants and chawl owners that all of them will get new premises /flats in the new building New Anand Park to be constructed by the O.P. No. 1. The O.P.No. 1 had also promised to the complainant that if he parts with the possession of his clinic then he would be given 225 Sq. fts. carpet area by way of flat and another 175 Sq. fts. carpet area for Commercial premises. The complainant has alleged that the O.P. No. 1 has executed two agreements one for residential premises on 27/06/2003 and another for commercial premises on 25/06/2003. The O.P. No. 1 was to hand over one commercial premises admeasuring 175 Sq. fts. carpet area on the ground floor facing 60 fts. wide road and another residential premises admeasuring 225 Sq. fts. in the building. According to the complainant the possession of both the premises was to be handed over within a period of 18 months from execution of agreement . Accordingly, both the agreement were duly notarized. The complainant has contended that though the O.P.No. 1.- Ganenshanand Builders and Developers had promised to hand over the premises within a period of 18 months but they failed to do so for the period of more than seven years and subjecting the complainant to great hardship. The complainant has alleged that he was a successful medical practioner and due to this act of the O.P. he was left with no premises for his commercial clinic. The O.P. No. 1 has indulged in deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice. The complainant has contended that he was a Consumer as defined under Section 2(i)(d) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The O.P. had also promised to pay Rs.30,000/- as deposit and also Rs. 3,000/- as rent per month for alternate accommodation till the handing over of possession of commercial premises but the O.P. failed to do so. The O.P. gave cheque towards deposit amount of Rs. 30,000/- but the same was also dishonoured The complainant has therefore, claimed rent for alternate accommodation from Sept.-2005 onwards. The complainant ha