Back
IN THE CIRCUIT BENCH OF THE TAMILNADU STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES
REDRESSAL COMMISSION, MADURAI.
PRESENT: THIRU.N. RAJASEKAR, PRESIDING JUDICIAL MEMBER
F.A.No.65/2016
(Against the order made in C.C.No57/2014 dated 23.05.2016 on the file of the
District Forum, Tiruchirappalli.)
TUESDAY, THE 05th DAY OF APRIL 2022
Mohammed Ali,
Mr.Raja Nakeeran,
Proprietors,
M.N.Real Estates,
No.12/G2 Kavitha Nilayam
Near Bus Stand, Tiruchirappali Road,
Thanjavur – 621 010. Appellant/Opposite Party
-Vs-
K.M.Chandrasekar,
Sri.Muthusamy Raja,
Adaikkampatti Village,
Alathur Taluk,
Perambalur District. Respondent/Complainant
Counsel for Appellant/Opposite party : M/s.A.Hajamohideen, Advocate.
Counsel for Respondent/Complainant : Mr.N.Mohan, Advocate.
This appeal coming before me for final hearing on 27.10.2021 and on hearing
arguments of both sides and upon perusing the material records, this
Commission made the following:-
ORDER
THIRU.N. RAJASEKAR, PRESIDINGJUDICIAL MEMBER.
1. This appeal has been filed by the appellant/opposite party under section 15
read with section 17(1) (a) (ii) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the
order of the learned District Forum, Tiruchirappalli made in C.C.No.57/2014, dated
23.05.2016, allowing the complaint.
2. For the sake of convenience and brevity, the parties are referred to here as
they stood arrayed in the learned District Consumer Disputes Redresssal Forum,
Tiruchirappalli.
3. The opposite party suffering by an order, directing the opposite party to pay a
sum of Rs.30,000/- with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of
complaint till the date of payment and also directing the opposite party to pay a sum
of Rs.50,000/- as compensation for mental agony to the complainant and to pay a
sum of Rs.2000/- towards cost to the complainant in the hands of the learned
District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Tiruchirappalli (hereinafter in short
“District Forum”) have preferred this appeal before this Commission.
4. The case of the complaint is as follows:- The opposite party is running a
business under the name and style of M.N.Nagar Real Estate. The complainant
joined the Housing Plot Scheme with the opposite party and was paying monthly
installment amount of Rs.600/- per month for 50 months from 12-08-2008 to
20-08-2012. As per the scheme, monthly draw will be conducted by the opposite
party. After maturity period of 50 months, he approached the opposite party and
requested them to register a housing plot in his name but they have not registered
any plot in his name. He issued legal notice to the opposite party on 23-12-2013 but
they have not given any reply. The opposite party be directed to register a housing
plot in his name at the appropriate registrar office and to pay compensation of
Rs.75,000/- for mental agony.
5.
Written version filed by the opposite party is as follows:- The opposite
party denies the allegations in the complaint. After the closure of the last installment
the complainant was allotted with plot No.175 comprised in S.F.No:101/2C of
M.Pudupatti west village. The plot was allotted to complainant by draw. The
complainant was informed to come forward for the registration of the plot. But the
complainant has not responded. Even now the opposite party is prepared to execute
the register Sale deed in respect of Plot No.175 comprised in 101/2C of M.Pudupatti
west village. The complaint is liable to be dismissed.
6.
The Learned District Forum, after taking into account of the evidences
adduced by both parties, had held that the opposite party committed deficiency in
service on the ground that no housing plot bearing No.175 is available in
S.F.No.101/2C of M.Pudu
