NCDRC

NCDRC

RA/43/2023

ARUNA KUMAR PATRI & ANR. - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/S. SKYTECH CONSTRUCTIONS PVT. LTD. & ANR. - Opp.Party(s)

MR. S.K. MOHANTY

17 Feb 2023

ORDER

NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
NEW DELHI
 
REVIEW APPLICATION NO. 43 OF 2023
 
IN
CC/518/2015
1. ARUNA KUMAR PATRI & ANR.
...........Appellants(s)
Versus 
1. M/S. SKYTECH CONSTRUCTIONS PVT. LTD. & ANR.
...........Respondent(s)

BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA,PRESIDING MEMBER
 HON'BLE MR. SUBHASH CHANDRA,MEMBER

For the Appellant :
For the Respondent :

Dated : 17 Feb 2023
ORDER

Review Application nos.42 to 46 of 2023 (for review)

In Chamber

 

PER HON’BLE MR. SUBHASH CHANDRA

 

The complainants have filed the present review application nos.42 to 46 of 2023 against the order dated 12.01.2023  passed by this Commission in Consumer Complaint Nos. 517, 518, 519, 520 and 756 of 2015 – Arpit Agarwal and Ors. vs Skytech Construction Pvt. Ltd., and anr. by which, the consumer complaints were disposed of.  We have gone through the impugned order as well review application and we find there are some typographical error in the final order dated 12.01.2023. The complainants have stated that in:-

 

  1. CC no. 517 of 2015 – in paragraph 4 (i) second paragraph, the amount mentioned in figures Rs.1,15,000/- be corrected as Rs.1,15,00,000/-. Accordingly, the OP is directed to pay amount of Rs.1,15,00,000/-. In paragraph 10, it has been stated that the complainants have paid an amount of Rs.47,52,810/-, whereas it should have been read as Rs.48,99,223/- and the interest amount of Rs.45,65,910/- to be corrected as Rs.49,87,873 and loss on account of rent of Rs.3,15,000/- to be corrected as Rs.7,40,000/-. He has therefore, prayed for refund of admitted paid amount of Rs.48,99,223/- and interest @ 24% amounting to Rs.49,87,873/- along with 7,40,000/- for loss on account of rent paid and Rs.15 lakh for mental and physical.

 

  1. CC no.518 of 2015 – In paragraph 18 910 the figures for sale consideration of Rs.43,09,200/- to be corrected as Rs.45,35,986/- and the amount for sum paid of Rs.36,28,800/- has to be corrected as Rs.43,09,200/-, whereas it should be read as : - for a sale consideration of rs.45,35,986/- as per BBA dated 06.09.2012 possession was promised after 42 months in October 2013. A sum of Rs.43,09,200/- has been paid. However, the possession has not been given till date.

 

  1. CC no.519 of 2015 – In paragraph 18 (2) the figures for sum paid of Rs.36,30,000/- is to be corrected as Rs47,21,293/- is to be corrected as under:
    1. As per BBA dated 23.06.2012 possession was promised after 42 months in March 2014. A sum of Rs.47,21,293/- has been paid. However, possession has not been given till date.

 

  1. CC no. 756 of 2015 – In paragraph 18 (4) the last payment date mentioned as 04.08.2015 to be corrected as 08.04.2013 and to read as below:
  1. A sum of Rs.42,44,693/- has been paid till 08.04.2013. However, possession has not been given till date.

In Paragraph 18 (1) (2) (3) and (4) the reference to paragraph 18 is to be corrected as paragraph 17 and to be read at all places as below:

               

Opposite party is directed to refund the amount deposited as per order in CC no. 517 of 2015 as per paragraph 17.

       

In view of the above, the review application filed by the complainants in RA Nos. 42, 43, 44 and 45 of 2023 are allowed.

 
......................J
DEEPA SHARMA
PRESIDING MEMBER
......................
SUBHASH CHANDRA
MEMBER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.