02-09-14 –     1.   Heard Mr. Shailendra Kumar Singh learned counsel appearing for the appellant on the limitation as well as on merit.

2.       Mr. Singh submitted that after filing written statement/show cause before the learned Lower Forum, the appellant had almost left Ranchi for about four years due to demise of his mother, and he had no track of the complaint case and therefore he could not file evidence and then ex-parte order was passed against him.  He further submitted that a chance be given to the appellant to enable him to show that there was no deficiency in service as alleged. He further submitted that due to the said reasons there has been delay in filing this appeal. 

3.       On 26.06.2014, after hearing learned counsel for the appellant, notice was issued to the appellant as to why the compensation and litigation cost allowed by the Learned District Consumer Forum be not enhanced.  Mr. Singh has filed a show cause reiterating the aforesaid grounds.

4.       The learned Lower Forum appointed Sri Sujit Bhagat as an expert engineer to inspect the flat and report about the area and the defects in the flat of the complainant.  In his report dated 04.06.2011, he found that there was short fall of 159 sq. ft. in the area of flat. On calculation, the cost of shortfall area came to Rs.95,400/- but as the complainant had claimed refund of Rs. 64,660/- only the claim to that extent was allowed.

 Further in view of the expert report the appellant was directed to complete the construction works of leakage slab in the toilet; the column in sanitary pipe and proper fitting in window, door and chokhat; and to construct window panel Chajja; or if the flat repairing work has been done by the complainant, a sum of Rs. 53,000/- estimated by the expert for these works, was to be paid to the complainant.  The appellant was further directed to allot car parking space with specific number to the complainant.  The appellant was further directed to pay of Rs. 50,000/- as compensation, and Rs. 5,000/- as litigation cost to the complainant, within 60 days of passing of the order, failing which the appellant was also liable to the pay interest @ 18% P.A, from the date of the order. 

5.       After carefully going through the brief and hearing Mr. Singh, we find that no grounds are made out for interference with the order under appeal. 

6.       Moreover the long delay of about one and half year has also not been explained.  A vague the general statement has been made, that after filing written statement/show cause, in the complaint case, the appellant had almost left Ranchi for about four years due to demise his mother, and lost track of the complaint case.

However, as prayed by Mr. Singh we are not enhancing the compensation and litigation cost award by the learned lower Forum.

In the result this appeal is dismissed on limitation as well as on merit.  

          Issue free copy of this order to all concerned for information and needful.

Ranchi,    

Dated: 02.09.2014