Per Shri Dhanraj Khamatkar, Hon’ble Member

          This appeal takes an exception to the order dated 31/08/2010 passed by District Consumer Forum, Mumbai Suburban in consumer complaint No.51/2009.

          The facts in brief leading to this appeal can be summerised as under :-

          The org. complainant/appellant is a member of the O.P./respondent-Society in respect of Garage No.5 on the ground floor of the Society.  The complainant/appellant had applied for NOC to the respondent/Society for selling Garage.  However, respondent had not replied.  O.P. had filed litigation before the Co-operative Court and Bombay City Civil Court to prevent use of Garage by the complainant/appellant.  However, they have not succeeded.  O.P. have not issued a share certificate in favour of the complainant despite accepting requisite sum of `250/- from the complainant.  Hence, org. complainant/appellant had filed consumer complaint praying direction to the O.P. for issuing a share certificate in favour of complainant and to pay compensation of `25,000/- for not allowing the complainant to sell the garage and not to interfere with the commercial use of the garage and other reliefs. 

Forum below after hearing both the parties have passed the order dated 31/08/2010 directing the O.P. to issue a share certificate, to take a decision on the application of the complainant/appellant for NOC and for use of the property for commercial purpose and communicate the same to the complainant.  Aggrieved by the said order, present appeal is filed.

The appellant is challenging the order of the Forum below on the ground that reliefs claimed by the appellant have not been granted by the Forum below.  It is the contention of the appellant that the complainant has not been given justice except issuance of share certificate, without passing a speaking order on other issues and refused to award compensation.

Admittedly, appellant is owner of Garage No.5.  She has obtained a licence from the competent authority under the Bombay Shops & Establishment Act for commercial purpose.  Appellant wanted to sell the garage and she has applied to the respondent/Society on 22/08/2005 for grant of NOC.  It is on record that respondent/Society had filed litigation before the Co-operative Court and Bombay City Civil Court to prevent the use of garage by the complainant.  However, they did not succeed in litigation.  Though the appellant has deposited an amount of `250/- for issuing a share certificate, respondent/Society has not issued the share certificate.

Respondent/Society is a Co-operative Housing Society and is governed by the provisions of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act.  Since, 22/08/2005 application of the appellant is pending with the respondent/Society for granting NOC for selling the garage owned by the appellant.  Respondent/Society had not taken any decision on the application of the appellant.  Similarly, being a member of the Society, it is the right of the appellant to get share certificate.  Despite of paying an amount of `250/- respondent/Society has not issued a share certificate.  On the contrary, respondent/Society had filed litigation in the Co-operative Court as well as in the Bombay City Civil Court to prevent the use of the garage by the complainant/appellant.  From the aforesaid facts, it is noticed that there is deficiency in service on the part of the respondent/Society.  Respondent/Society miserably failed to discharge its lawful duties.  On perusal of the reliefs awarded by the Forum below in its order at serial Nos.3&4, it is seen that the Forum below had not given a time limit to the respondent/Society to take decision.  Despite of the fact that respondent/Society is deficient in service Forum below has not granted any compensation for mental agony suffered by the appellant.  Appellant has requested for NOC and since 2005 decision was not taken.  As regards commercial use of property despite of the request of the appellant, Management Committee of the respondent/Society had not taken any decision.  In view of the aforesaid facts, we are of the opinion that reliefs granted by the Forum below is not adequate.  We hold accordingly and pass the following order :-

                   -: ORDER :-

1.       Appeal is partly allowed.

2.       Respondent/Society is directed to issue a share certificate of 5 shares each of `50/- in favour of the appellant/complainant.

3.       Respondent/Society is directed to place application of appellant dated 22/08/2005 before the Management Committee and take a decision within a period of one month from the date of receipt of the order.  Similarly, as regards commercial use of the property, respondent/Society should place the subject before the Management Committee and take a decision within period of one month from the date of receipt of the order.

4.       Respondent/Society is directed to pay compensation of `15,000/- for mental agony to the appellant/complainant.

5.       Respondent/Society is further directed to pay cost of `5,000/- to the appellant/complainant and bear its own costs.

6.       Copies of the order be furnished to the parties.