Delhi

New Delhi

CC/747/2016

Anita Gupta - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s Ansal LandMark Township Pvt Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

17 May 2017

ORDER

 CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-VI

   (DISTT. NEW DELHI), ‘M’ BLOCK, 1^STFLOOR,

VIKAS BHAWAN, I.P.ESTATE,

NEW DELHI-110002.

 

 

Case No.CC/747/2016                    Dated:17/05/2017                                     

 

          In the matter of:

          Mrs. Anita Gupta

         W/o Mr. K.C. Gupta,

         R/o E-101, Sanmati Kunj,

        Plot No. 19A, Sector-6 Dwarka,

         New Dlhi-110075

                                                                                                ………. Complainant

 

                                    Versus

 

      M/S. Ansal Land Mark Township Private Limited

      Registered office-4 Scindia House,

      2^nd Floor, Connought Place,

       New Delhi-110001

 

  Also at:

    112, Ansal Bhawn,

   16 Kasturba Gandhi Marg

     New Delhi-110001

                                                                                     ….. Opposite parties

 

 

 

 

 

                                      ORDER

 

 NIPUR CHANDNA, MEMBER

 

1. In the present complaint, the complainant has prayed for:-

 

1.  Direct respondent nos. 1 to 3 companies to confirm the allotment of the Flat/Unit no. C-201, in project “ Park Arena”, Sector-80, Faridabad, Haryana, in favour of complainant; and
2. Direct respondent nos. 1 to 3 companies not to shift complainant to any other flat other than the flat that is purchased/booked by the complainant i.e. Flat/Unit no. C-201, in project “ Park Arena”, Sector 80, Faridabad, Haryana;
3. Direct respondent nos.1 to 4 to complete pending formalities, if any, with respect to Flat/ Unit purchased by complainant i.e. Flat/Unit no. C-201, in project “Park Arena”, Sector-80, Faridabad, Haryana;
4. Desist respondent nos. 1 to 4 from continuing and/or adopting any such unfair trade practices in future;
5. Award Rs. 2 lacs towards compensation for mental agony suffered, physical pain and financial loss caused to the complainant since last one and half year for the acts and omissions of respondent no. 1 to 4;
6. Award litigation cost of Rs. 30,000/- in favour of the complainant and against the respondent,
7. Pass such other and further order(s)/directions(s) as this Hon’ble Forum deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. 

 

         We have heard arguments advanced at the bar and have perused the record.

 

 

 

 Section 11(1) of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 reads as under:-

“Subject to the other provisions of this Act, the District Forum shall have jurisdiction to entertain complaints where the value of the goods or services and the compensation, if any, claimed (does not exceed rupees twenty lakhs).”

 

     In the present complaint the complainant in the prayer clause no. ‘A’ prayed for the possession of the plot worth Rs.26,85.000/- beside the other reliefs claimed against the Ops, the total prayed claim is beyond the pecuniary jurisdiction of this Forum as it exceed Rs.20,00,000/-.

 

In view of the above this District Forum has no pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain and adjudicate the present complaint.

 

      Under these circumstances the complaint is not maintainable before this Forum, being beyond pecuniary jurisdiction of this District Forum. The complainant is at liberty to file it before the appropriate forum having jurisdiction.

       With these observations present complaint is disposed off, with the direction to the office to return the complaint with annexure to the complainant after retaining the copy for the record. File be consigned to the record room.

             Pronounced in open Forum on  17/05/2017.

            (S K SARVARIA)

     PRESIDENT

 

 

 

                     (H M VYAS)                                                 (NIPUR CHANDNA)

                    MEMBER                                                             MEMBER