ORAL

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

                              UTTAR PRADESH, LUCKNOW

                                 APPEAL NO. 853 OF 2018

(Against the judgment & order dated 17-04-2018 in Complaint Case             No.173/2015 of the District Consumer Forum-I, Lucknow)

          Banarsi Singh

S/o Late Sri Fateh Bahadur Singh

R/o E-706, Paradise Crystal

Sushant Gold City, Lucknow-226030

                                                                                    ...Appellant

                                                     Vs.

M/s Ansal Properties & Infrastructure Ltd.

Changed Address Shoping Square

Sector-D, Sushant Golf City

Lucknow-226030

Through Executive Director

                                                                                     ...Respondent

BEFORE:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AKHTER HUSAIN KHAN, PRESIDENT

For the Appellant        :  Sri Banarsi Singh in person

For the Respondent     :  Sri Vikas Kumar Verma, Advocate.               

Dated :  14-05-2018

                                            JUDGMENT

MR. JUSTICE A. H. KHAN, PRESIDENT

This is an appeal filed under Section-15 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 before State Commission against order dated 17-04-2018 passed by District Consumer Forum-I, Lucknow in Complaint Case No. 173/2015 Banarsi Singh V/s Executive Director, Operations, M/s Ansal Properties and Infrastructure Limited whereby the District Consumer Forum has dismissed complaint holding that the valuation of complaint is beyond pecuniary jurisdiction of the District Consumer Forum.

Feeling aggrieved with the order passed by District Consumer Forum complainant has filed this appeal.

Appellant Sri Banarsi Singh appeared in person.

Learned Counsel Sri Vikas Kumar Verma appeared for respondent.

I have heard both parties and perused impugned order as well as

:2:

records.

The appellant has contended that the relief claimed by complainant in complaint is within pecuniary jurisdiction of District Consumer Forum. The District Consumer Forum has committed error in dismissing complaint on the ground of lack of pecuniary jurisdiction.

Learned Counsel for the respondent has supported order passed by District Consumer Forum and contended that the valuation of complaint is beyond pecuniary jurisdiction of District Consumer Forum.

I have considered the submission made by appellant as well as by learned Counsel for the respondent.

Indisputably the complaint has been filed for alleged deficiencies arising out of allotment of two flats made by opposite party to the complainant and the aggregate price of said two flats is above Rs.20,00,000/-.

In view of proposition laid down by Hon’ble National Commission in the case of Ambrish Kumar Shukla and others V/s Ferrous Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. reported in 2016(4) CPR 83 NC the valuation of complaint shall be assessed on the basis of price of flat and relief claimed. Therefore, the District Consumer Forum has rightly held that the valuation of complaint is beyond pecuniary jurisdiction of District Consumer Forum.

In view of above I find no sufficient ground for interference in finding recorded by the District Consumer Forum regarding valuation of complaint.

In view of above appeal is disposed of finally with liberty to appellant/complainant to file complaint before State Commission in accordance with law.  

Let copy of this order be made available to the parties positively within 15 days as per rules.

                                                               ( JUSTICE A H KHAN )

                                                                               PRESIDENT

            Pnt.