Delhi

StateCommission

A/11/77

VARDHMAN PROPERTIES LTD. - Complainant(s)

Versus

ARUN KAPOOR - Opp.Party(s)

24 Feb 2016

ORDER

IN THE STATE COMMISSION: DELHI

(Constituted under Section 9 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986)

                                                                     

Date of Arguments: 24.02.2016

Date of Decision: 01.03.2016

 

1. First Appeal No. 101/2011

 

(Arising out of the order dated 07.02.2011 passed in Complaint Case No. 267/2010 by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-X Udyog Sadan, C-22 & 23, Qutub Institutional Area (Behind Qutub Hotel) New Delhi-110016)

In the matter of:

Sh. Arun Kapoor

S/o Sh. S.D.Kapoor

R/o B-1-A/2C, Janakpuri

New Delhi-110048                                       .........Appellant

 

Versus

 

Vardhman Property Ltd.

G-9, Vardhman Trade Center

Nehru Place

New Delhi-110019                                       ..........Respondent       

 

2. First Appeal No. 77/2011

 

(Arising out of the order dated 07.02.2011 passed in Complaint Case No. 267/2010 by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-X Udyog Sadan, C-22 & 23, Qutub Institutional Area (Behind Qutub Hotel) New Delhi-110016)

In the matter of:

Vardhman Property Ltd.

G-9, Vardhman Trade Center

Nehru Place

New Delhi-110019                                                          .........Appellant

 

Versus

 

Sh. Arun Kapoor

S/o Sh. S.D.Kapoor

R/o B-1-A/2C, Janakpuri

New Delhi-110048                                                          ..........Respondent                                                                                     

CORAM

 

O P GUPTA                              -                  MEMBER (JUDICIAL)

 

1.         Whether reporters of local newspaper be allowed to see the judgment? Yes

2.         To be referred to the reporter or not? Yes

O P GUPTA -  MEMBER (JUDICIAL)

 

JUDGEMENT

                                     

1.      By this common order we will be deciding two cross appeals bearing Nos. 101/2011 and 77/2011. Both arise out of order dated 07.02.2011 passed by the Ld. District Forum-X in complaint case No. 267/2010. In appeal No. 101/2011 the complainant has come in appeal for interest, compensation and costs of litigation. In appeal No. 77/2011 OP has come in appeal for dismissing complaint. The appeals involve short question as to whether the complainant/appellant was a ‘consumer’ within the meaning of the said term as defined in Section 2(1)(d) of Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The said question has been answered by the Hon’ble National Commission in Revision Petition No. 3754/2014 titled as Vardhan Properties Ltd. Vs. Somdutt Sharma decided on 09.12.2014. That pertains to project of the builder of the present case. In the said case the orders of the District Forum and State Commission were set aside as the booking was for allotment of commercial space. Similar view has been taken by the Hon’ble National Commission in First Appeal No. 421/2015 titled as M/s Unicity Projects Vs. Rajan Bhateja and Anr. decided on 09.10.2015.
2.      In the instant case also the booking was for allotment of the commercial space as is clear from the copy of the application for allotment which is Annexure A.
3.      The counsel for the complainant submitted that respondent did not take this plea in reply. The same was refuted by counsel for the OP by submitting that in preliminary objection No. 1 it is mentioned that complainant was not a consumer under Consumer Protection Act 1986. It is true that objection does not elaborate the plea as to why complainant was not a consumer but the objection is wide enough to include booking being for commercial purpose. When facts are not in dispute, objection of the pleadings being improper. Loose on the ground.
4.      Appeal No. 101/11 is dismissed and appeal No. 77/2011 is accepted. The appeal fails and is dismissed. However, the respondent will be at liberty to take recourse to Civil Suit after excluding the time spend in the proceedings under Consumer Protection Act, 1986 as per the decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Laxmi Engineering Works Vs. PSG Industrial Institute (1995) 3 SCC 583.
5.      Copy of the order be made available to the parties free of costs as per rules and thereafter the file be consigned to Record Room.
6.      One copy be sent to the District Forum concerned for information.

 

 

(O P Gupta)
Member (Judicial)