Date of Filing: 08/11/2011

        Date of Order: 16/12/2011

BEFORE THE I ADDITIONAL DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM SESHADRIPURAM BANGALORE -  20

Dated:  16^th DAY OF DECEMBER 2011

PRESENT

SRI.H.V.RAMACHANDRA RAO,B.Sc.,B.L., PRESIDENT

SRI.KESHAV RAO PATIL, B.COM., M.A., LL.B., PGDPR, MEMBER

SMT.NIVEDITHA .J, B.SC.,LLB., MEMBER

COMPLAINT NO.2044 OF 2011

Sri.R.Thimmashetty,

S/o.Rangashetty,

Aged About 63 years,

R/at: Guru Prasad Nilaya,

Near Krishna Arts College,

Banu Talkies Road, Hasan.

(Rep. by Sri.H.K.Revanasiddappa, Advocate)                   ….  Complainant.

V/s

The Karnataka Housing Borad,

Kaaveri Bhavan, Bangalore.

Rep. by its Housing Commissioner. 

(Notice served remained absent)                                   …. Opposite Party.

BY SRI. H.V.RAMACHANDRA RAO, PRESIDENT

-: ORDER:-

The brief antecedents that led to the filing of the complainant U/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act seeking direction to the Opposite Party to pay Rs.1,00,000, are necessary:-

The complainant being a teacher had opted for a site measuring 40 x 60 ft on 22.10.2009 with the opposite party and paid the sum of Rs.41,550/-.  As the opposite party did not respond in allotting the site, the complainant wrote to the opposite party on 15.11.2010 seeking certain relief.  As there was no response the complainant made another request on 28.03.2011 and issued a notice on 19.08.2011.  In spite of that the opposite party neither allotted the site nor refunded the money.  Hence the complaint.

2.       In this case the notice though served on the opposite party, did not bring it to contest the matter and remained absent throughout the proceeding.  Hence the complainant has submitted his complaint and documents be read as his evidence.  Hence arguments were heard.

3.       The points that arise for our consideration are:-

:- POINTS:-

1. Whether there is any deficiency in service?
2. What Order?

4.       Our findings are:-

Point (A) & (B):        As per the final Order

                             for the following:- 

-:REASONS:-

Point A & B:-

5.       Reading the complaint in conjunction with the documents on record, it is established that the complainant had applied for a site with the opposite party measuring 40 x 60 feet and paid an amount of Rs.41,550/- on 22.01.2009 by D.D. which has been encashed.  In spite of receiving the amount the opposite party has neither cared to reply nor allotted the site nor refunded the money.  The complainant wrote to the opposite party on 28.03.2011, 08.08.2011 in the matter.  In spite of receiving it, the opposite party has neither allotted the site nor refunded the money.

6.       Receiving the money from the complainant and not rendering the service of allotting the site certainly amounts to deficiency in service and also unfair trade practice.  Hence under these circumstances we hold the above points accordingly and proceed to pass the following:-

ORDER

1.       The complaint is Allowed-in-part.

2.       The opposite party is directed to pay to the complainant the sum of Rs.41,550/- together with interest thereon at the rate of 12% per annum from 20.04.2009 until payment within 30 days from the date of this order.

3.       The opposite party is also directed to pay Rs.2,000/- towards costs of this litigation.

4.       Return the extra sets filed by the parties to the concerned as under Regulation 20(3) of the Consumer’s Protection Regulation 2005.

5.       Send a copy of this order to both parties free of costs, immediately.

(Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed and typed by him, corrected and then pronounced by us in the Open Forum on this the 16^th Day of December 2011)

MEMBER                                             MEMBER                                PRESIDENT