STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, MAHARASHTRA, MUMBAI Appeal No.RBT/A/23/48 IN A/19/25 (Arising against the order dated 05/08/2017 passed by the Addl.D.F. Mumbai Suburban in CC/12/211)

Mr.Kartik Bhatt Plot no.263, Swastik Sadan 8th Road, ...... Appellant/org.OP no.2 Khar West, Mumbai 400 052 Versus

1.Ms.Sarojini B. Bikhchandani Ms.Shobha B. Bikhchandani Ms.Aruna B. Bikhchandani ……Respondents/org.complainants R/o. Flat no.304, "B" wing Jolly Bhavan No.3 Co-op. Hsg.Society Ltd.

Dr.Ambedkar Road, Khar West Mumbai 400 052

2. The Jolly Bhavan No.3 Co-op.Hsg.Society Ltd.

Through its Chairman & Secretary Plot no.661, Corner of 16th Cross Road &

……Respondents/org.OPs Dr.Ambedkar Road Khar West, Mumbai 400 052

3.Saranga Estates Pvt.Ltd.

RNA Corporate Park Next to Collector's office Kalanagar, Bandra (East)

Mumbai 400 051 BEFORE: Justice S.P.Tavade – President Vijay C.Premchandani – Member PRESENT: Adv.Y.C.Naidu a/w. Adv.Digambar Thakare for appellant.

Advocate Sajira Jondhale a/w.Adv.U.B.Wavikar for respondent no.1/ org.complainants Advocate Mohit Bhansali for respondent No.3 FINAL ORDER (Dt.19/05/2025)

Per Hon’ble Vijay C.Premchandani – Member

1. The present appeal is filed by the appellant u/sec.15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, against the impugned order passed by the Ld. Additional District Consumer Commission/Forum, Mumbai Suburban in consumer complaint no.CC/12/211 dated 05/08/2017, whereby the Ld. District Consumer Commission has partly allowed the consumer complaint by passing the following order:-

ORDER

1.RBT Consumer Complaint No. 211/2012 is partly allowed.

2. The opp. No.1 and 2 are directed to execute registered permanent Alternate Accommodation dated 5.5.2010 at the expenses to be incurred by them, within four months from the date of receipt of the Order.

3. The opp. No.1 and 2 are directed to pay Rs.7,19,197/- (Rupees Seven lacs nineteen thousand one hundred ninety seven) with interest @ 9% p.a.

from 30.12.2010 till payment.

4. The opp. No.1 and 2 are directed to pay Rs.1,00,000/- (One lac) as compensation for mental agony to complainants.

5. No order as to cost.

2. Being aggrieved with the said order, the present appellant/original Opponent no.2 has filed the appeal with delay condonation application of 247 days. The delay condonation application was rejected by this Commission and the present appellant went before the Hon’ble National Commission against the said order. The Hon’ble National Commission in Revision Petition Nos.1024/2022 to 1027/2022 passed a common order by condoning the delay to file the present appeal and with a direction to decide the present appeals by this Commission on merits.

3. The present appeal was preferred by the appellant on the following grounds:-

In the grounds of appeal, it is mentioned that the Ld. District Consumer Commission erred in passing the impugned order dated 05/08/2017 to the extent of passing orders against the appellant herein despite no averment and/or evidence before the Ld. District Consumer Commission establishing that the appellant has provided services of any nature to the respondent no.1 directly and not as an agent/employee/Executive Director of respondent no.3. In the impugned order the Ld. District Consumer Commission has held that the appellant is simply the Executive Director of the respondent no.3 and thereby is not the service provider in question and despite the same, has beyond jurisdiction imposed its order upon the present appellant.

4. It is further contended in the grounds of Appeal that the present appeal is limited to challenging the jurisdiction of the Ld. District Consumer Commission with respect to the aforementioned original complaint and any averments herein or lack thereof shall not prejudice appeal, if any, taken out by the respondent no.3 herein against the impugned order. Therefore, the appellant has prayed that the impugned order passed by the Ld. District Consumer Commission be quashed and set aside.

5. The present appeal was admitted and the noti