F.A.No. 602  OF 2007 AGAINST C.D.NO.37 OF 2001 DISTRICT CONSUMER FORUM SRIKAKULAM

Between

1. Secretary, Srikakulam Cooperative House
   Building Society Limited, Srikakulam
2. President, Srikakulam Cooperative House
   Building Society Limited, Srikakulam

                                                                                        Appellants/opposite parties                                       

        A N D

B.Thavitireddy S/o late Ramayya
Dr.No.12-14-18/19, L.B.S.Colony
Srikakulam Town and District
                                                                                        Respondent/complainant

Counsel for the Appellants             Sri Aravala Rama Rao

Counsel for the Respondent           Sri T.Raja Sekhar Rao

 QUORUM:                 SRI SYED ABDULLAH, HON’BLE MEMBER

&

                            SRI R.LAKSHMINARSIMHA RAO, HON’BLE MEMBER

                          FRIDAY THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF JULY

                                            TWO THOUSAND TEN

Oral Order ( As per R.Lakshminarsimha Rao, Member)
                                                 ***

The Appeal is filed by the Opposite parties against the order dated 16.8.2005 in C.D.No.37/01 passed by the District Forum, Srikakulam.

The factual matrix leading to file of the Appeal is that the complainant paid an amount of Rs.48,000/- to the Opposite parties 1 & 2 for allotment of a plot. The Opposite parties allotted Plot No.46 in favour of the complainant. However, the Opposite parties failed to execute the Registered Sale Deed in his favour whereby the complainant was compelled to file the complaint before the District Forum seeking for allotment of a plot measuring 60’ x 40’ and for compensation of Rs.10,000/-.

1.           The Opposite parties resisted the claim contending that a public notice offering house sites to an extent of 5 ½ cents measuring 60’ x 40’ for a consideration of Rs.45,000/-. Subsequently, a circular was issued and communicated to all the members of the scheme including the complainant informing them that the allotment of sites would be made by holding draw of lots. The complainant was allotted plot bearing No.46 and the fact of allotment of Plot No.46 was informed to her. The complainant had not raised any objection for about 3 years in regard to the allotment of Plot No.46.

2.           The District Forum has allowed the complaint directing the Opposite parties to allot site measuring 60’ x 40’ at R.K.Nagar colony and pay Rs.2,000/- towards compensation, Rs.1000/- towards costs.

3.           Feeling aggrieved by the order of the District Forum, the Opposite parties filed the Appeal contending that the complainant is not a Consumer within the meaning of the provisions of the C.P.Act and the claim of the complainant was not filed within the period of 3 years from the date of cause of action. There was no deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite parties as the Plot No.46 was allotted by conducting draw of lots and the matter of allotment of the plot was informed to the complainant and that no plots are available in R.K.Nagar for the reason that all the plots were allotted in the year 1997.

4.           During pendency of the Appeal, the Opposite parties have come forward to execute Sale deed and accordingly executed Registered Sale deed on 23.10.2009 in favour of the complainant. The Opposite parties handedover the Sale Deed to the son of the complainant. The Opposite parties had sent cheque bearing No.127313, dt.26.11.09 for an amount of Rs.1470/- towards the differential amount. As the son of the complainant was residing in Bangalore the Envelope containing the cheque was returned to the Opposite parties. The Opposite parties had filed the Envelope that was returned unserved.

5.           The complainant has refused to receive the amount covered under the cheque.

6.           The Opposite parties have filed the copy of the Sale Deed executed by them in favour of the complainant in respect of the Plot No.46 in Survey No.2/1, 2/2, 2/5 and 4 of Khajipeta (Panchayat), Arasavilli (Village). The impugned order does not prescribe a specific number of the plot to be delivered to the complainant. All that the impugned order directed the Opposite parties is to execute a Sale deed in respect of a plot measuring 60’ x 40’ and pay Rs.2000/- towards compensation and Rs.1000/- towards costs. The complainant has not preferred appeal against the order of the District Forum. In the light of the execution  of the Sale deed in respect of Plot No.46 that measures 60’ x 40’ and issuance of cheque for Rs.1470/-, in favour of the complainant, we are inclined to hold that there had been  substantial compliance of the direction contained in the impugned order. As such, nothing is left to be decided in this Appeal.

Accordingly, the Appeal is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

                                                        MEMBER

                                                        MEMBER

                                                      Dt.23.07.2010