Delhi

North West

CC/744/2017

RINKESHWAR - Complainant(s)

Versus

ANTRIKSH REALTECH P LTD. - Opp.Party(s)

05 Apr 2024

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL COMMISSION-V, NORTH-WEST GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI
CSC-BLOCK-C, POCKET-C, SHALIMAR BAGH, DELHI-110088.
 
Complaint Case No. CC/744/2017
( Date of Filing : 08 Sep 2017 )
 
1. RINKESHWAR
S/O SH.SURYA DEV SINGH R/O B-2/23,PHASE-IV,AYA NAGAR EXTN.NEW DELHI-47
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. ANTRIKSH REALTECH P LTD.
34/C-8,SEC-8,ROHINI,DELHI-110085,THROUGH ITS DIRECTORS
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
  NIPUR CHANDNA PRESIDING MEMBER
 
PRESENT:
 
Dated : 05 Apr 2024
Final Order / Judgement

Ms. NIPUR CHANDNA, MEMBER

 

ORDER        

05.04.2024

 

  1. The complainant has filed the present complaint alleging the deficiency in service on the part of the OP. During the pendency of the present complaint case OP has strongly challenged the maintainability of the present complaint on the ground of pecuniary jurisdiction, hence, needs to be decided first.
  2. Perusal of the record shows that the complainant has booked the apartment in the project of the OP titled as “ Antriksh Sanskriti, Indirapuram” at the total sale price of Rs. 31,58,000/-. Complainant has further prayed for the refund of the deposited amount of Rs. 13,03,527/- along with 18% interest beside this he has also claimed compensation to the tune of Rs. 2 Lakhs as well as litigation cost to the tune of Rs. 50,000/- as such this Commission has not pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain and adjudicate the present complaint.
  3. Admittedly, the complainant had purchased the flat in question for a sum of Rs. 31,58,000/-. The complainant has prayed for refund of sum of Rs. 13,03,527/- along with interest. He also further prayed for compensation and litigation to the tune of Rs. 2,50,000/-, which goes beyond the Pecuniary Jurisdiction of District Forum i.e. Rs. 20 lacs. In the light of judgment of Ambrish Kumar Shukla and Ors. Vs. Ferrous Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., Case no. 97 of 2016, decided by Hon’ble NCDRC on 07/10/2016 reported as Manu/CF/0499/16 the present complaint case is not maintainable before this Commission due to lack of pecuniary jurisdiction as the cost of the flat/plot and relief claimed exceeds the Pecuniary Jurisdiction of this Forum. 
  4. Accordingly, the complaint be returned to the complainant along with annexures/ documents by retaining a copy of the same for records with liberty to file the complaint before the competent Forum as per the Law. The particulars in the light of the judgment of Hon’ble NCDRC in the matter of Tushar Batra & Anr. Vs. M/S Unitech Limited decided on 26/04/2017, Case no.-299 of 2014 are as follows.

Date of presentation of complaint :-    08.09.2017

Date of return of complaint :-05.04.2024

Name of complainant :-Mr. Rinkeshwar

 

  1. Copy of the order be given to the parties free of cost as per order dated 04.04.2022 of Hon’ble State Commission after receiving the application from the parties in the registry. Order be uploaded on www.confonet.nic.in.

 

Announced  in open Forum on 05.04.2024.

 

 

Sanjay Kumar                                          Nipur Chandna                              

President                                                             Member                                  

 

 

 
 
[ NIPUR CHANDNA]
PRESIDING MEMBER
 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.