RAJIV SETHI vs Ansal Properties and Industries Limited

THE present appeal, filed by the appellant, under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as ''the Act''), is directed against order dated 10.10.2001, passed by District Forum (New Delhi), Kasturba Gandhi Marg, New Delhi in Complaint Case No. C-882/1999 - entitled Shri Rajiv Sethi v. M/s. Ansal Properties and Industries Limited.

THE facts, relevant for the disposal of the present appeal lie in a narrow compass. THE appellant, Shri Rajiv Sethi had filed a complaint under Section 12 of the Act before the District Forum averring therein that the appellant had booked a shop measuring 250 sq. ft. in Citi Centre Complex of the respondent on 8.9.1996 and for the above purpose had paid an amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- to the respondent by means of cheque. It was stated that against the above said booking, the respondent issued an allotment letter to the appellant wherein the area of the space proposed to be allotted in favour of the appellant was shown as 522 sq. ft. and the appellant was intimated to pay the balance amount amounting to Rs. 2,65,400/- after deducting the sum of Rs. 1,00,000/-, initially paid. It was stated that the appellant wrote back to the respondent stating that the appellant was not in a position to accept shop having 522 sq. ft. area and requested the respondent to refund the amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- together with interest. In the complaint filed by the appellant, the grievance of the appellant, in nut-shell, was that the respondent did not refund the amount and intimated the appellant that the amount in question had been forfeited and nothing was due and payable to the appellant. In the complaint filed by the appellant, it was prayed that the respondent be directed to refund the amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- together with compound interest @ 24% p.a. from the date of deposit till payment. THE learned District Forum, vide impugned order, has allowed the complaint filed by the appellant and has directed the respondent to refund the amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- together with interest @ 24% p.a. from 8.9.1996 till realization. THE learned District Forum has also awarded a cost of Rs. 10,000/- to be paid to the appellant by the respondent. Not feeling satisfied with the relief granted by the learned District Forum, the appellant, Sh. Rajiv Sethi, has filed the present appeal under Section 15 of the Act.

We have heard the A/Rep. of the appellant at length on the question of admission of the present appeal and have also carefully gone through the documents/material on record. During the course of arguments, it has been stated by the Authorised Representative of the appellant that relief granted to the appellant by the District Forum is highly inadequate because the District Forum has awarded only simple interest @ 24% p.a. It is contended that the District Forum should have awarded compound interest and not simple interest. In our opinion, the above contention advanced by the Authorised Representative of the appellant on behalf of the appellant is devoid of merit. The learned District Forum, as already stated, has awarded interest @ 24% p.a. and has also awarded a sum of Rs. 10,000/- as cost. The above relief cannot be stated to be inadequate, in the given facts, by any stretch of imagination. No other point is urged or pressed before us by the Authorised Representative of the appellant. In our opinion, in the given facts, no fault can be found with the findings of the learned District Forum. The order being impugned in the present proceedings is a well-reasoned order which suffers from no infirmity, so as to call for any interference by this Commission in exercise of its appellate powers. The present appeal, filed by the appellant, is therefore, devoid of substance. The same merits dismissal. Accordingly, the same is dismissed in limine with no order as to costs. Appeal dismissed.