O R D E R

JUSTICE R.N.BISWAL, PRESIDENT

          This appeal has been preferred against the order dated 17.6.2014 passed by the District Forum, Dhenkanal in C.C.no. 66 of 2008 directing the appellant to refund the earnest money deposited by the respondent at the rate of 10% interest per annum from the date of deposit till payment, besides giving him litigation expenses of Rs.5,000/-.

          Appellant as complainant filed the aforesaid case stating that being influenced  by the advertisement made by the  respondent in daily newspaper ‘The Sambad’ he applied for allotment of one shop room at Mahisapat and paid security deposit of Rs.30,000/- through Demand Draft on 28.12.2004 in token whereof respondent gave him a receipt. At the time of filing of the application he enquired about the terms and conditions of allotment of shop room to which the respondent gave impression that the same would be decided soon. He also assured that the shop room would be delivered within a year. Respondent supplied the brochure on payment of Rs.130/-   on 18.8.2006 only by which time around two years had already been elapsed from the date of application for allotment of the shop room. Then he was asked to deposit Rs.30,000/- towards  instalment  which he paid on 2.9.2006.  The brochure was subsequently prepared containing terms suitable only to the respondent. Since the shop room was not allotted to the appellant for a pretty long time, he filed the aforesaid case with prayer to direct the respondent to refund him the EMD  and first instalment amounting to Rs.60,000/- along with interest at the rate of 10% per annum till realisation and to pay compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- towards mental agony and financial loss.

          Being noticed, respondent appeared through his counsel and filed written version contending that the appellant on his own will intended to take one shop room and thereby deposited the EMD on going through the terms and conditions of the brochure, but did not pay the balance amount. Accordingly, respondent prayed to dismiss the case.

          After hearing the counsel for the parties and going through the materials available on record, the District Forum passed the impugned order as stated earlier, being aggrieved against which, the appellant who was complainant before the District Forum has preferred the present appeal since the District Forum did not direct the respondent to pay Rs.30,000/- more with interest.

          It is an admitted fact that appellant deposited  Rs.30,000/- towards first instalment, besides the earnest money of Rs.30,000/-, but the District Forum as it appears inadvertently did not direct the respondent to refund the said amount of Rs.30,000/- with interest.

          So, the appeal is allowed ex parte and the impugned order is set aside. The respondent is directed  to refund Rs.60,000/- along with interest at the rate of 10% per annum from the date of deposit till payment, besides litigation cost of Rs.2,000/-.

          Records received from the District Forum be sent back forthwith.