Per Mr.H.K.Bhaise, Hon’ble Member

1)                The present complaint has been filed by the complainants u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. According to the complainants, they had booked the plot bearing No.127 comprising 12,110 Sq.Ft. and paid the amount of Rs.39,05,000/- by cheque as well as by cash. The said plot was registered and transferred in the name of the complainants on 17^th September, 2007 after receiving payment.  The complainants wrote letters to the opponents for progress of the work and to fulfill the promises of amenities and facilities as promised at the time of the booking.  On 30^th March, 2010, notice was sent to the opponents.  The said was replied by the opponents on 16^th April, 2010.  The complainant No.1 wrote letter to the opponents on 27^th April, 2010 demanding all the payment receipts. The complainants found that additional amenities and facilities were not fulfilled by the opponents. Till 20^th March, 2010, there was no progress.  The opponents failed to give the possession of the plot and to construct the plot as per promise.  Therefore, the complainants filed consumer complaint against the opponents before the Hon’ble State Commission numbered as CC/10/116 for the claim of Rs.44,55,000/-.  During the pendency of the complaint, the opponents showed the interest to settle the matter by paying the amount with interest.  Accordingly, the opponents paid Rs.32,55,000/- and balance amount of Rs.6,50,000/- and interest on Rs.39,05,000/- was to be paid by the opponents.  On 9^th January, 2012, the complaint was on the board before the Bench No.1 of the Hon’ble State Commission.  The said complaint was dismissed as both the parties and their advocates were absent.   As the there is deficiency in service and unfair trade practice, the complainants have filed this complaint for recovery of amount of Rs.6,50,000/- with interest at the rate of 12% per annum amounting to Rs.12,43,050/-.  They have also claimed compensation of Rs.50,000/- and cost of Rs.25,000/-. 

2)                The opponents remained absent though duly served therefore the matter was proceeded ex-parte against them. 

3)                The complainants filed their affidavit of evidence and submitted written notes of argument.  After hearing the learned advocate for the complainants and after going through the record following points are arise for our consideration

POINTS

REASONS

4) As to Point No.1 & 2 :- As per para 10 of the complaint, the complainants filed complaint before the Hon’ble State Commission bearing No.CC/10/116 for the claim of Rs.44,55,000/-.  During pendency of the complaint, settlement talks were going on and the opponents paid Rs.32,55,000/- to the complainants.  According to the complainants, the amount of Rs.6,50,000/- and interest on Rs.39,05,000/- was to be paid by the opponents to the complainants.  The opponents failed to pay this amount.  Meanwhile, the complaint was dismissed for default as both the parties and their advocate remained absent on the day of hearing.  From the complaint, it is clear that the complaint was already filed before the Hon’ble State Commission and the same was dismissed for default.  The present complaint is filed on the same facts after dismissal of the complaint by the Hon’ble State Commission.  As the complaint was filed before the Hon’ble State Commission and the same was dismissed, the complaint is not maintainable on the same facts before this Forum.  Therefore, the complainants are not entitled for the relief as prayed.  Hence, we proceed to pass the following order.

O R D E R

1. Complaint stands dismissed.
2. Parties are left to bear their own costs.
3. Inform the parties accordingly.

Pronounced

Dated 22^nd April, 2014