STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

BIHAR, PATNA

Complaint Case No.36 of 2018

Priya Ranjan Shrivastava, S/O- Late Hiranand Prasad, Resident of Saket Vihar, MitraMandal Colony, Anishabad, Patna, Distt.- Patna                                                                                                                                               …........... Complainant

versus

1. Prasambi Design & Construction Pvt. Ltd. Registered office at G-1 Prasambi’s Saryug Vihar, Gosai Tola Patliputra Colony, Patna through its Managing Director Prabhash Kumar.
2. Prabhash Kumar, S/O- Not known, The Managing Director, Prasambi Design & Construction Pvt. Ltd., G-1 Prasambi’s Saryug Vihar, Gosai Tola  Patliputra Colony, Patna.
3. Dilip Narayan, S/O- Not known, The Director, Design & Construction Pvt. Ltd., G-1 Prasambi’s  Saryug  Vihar, Gosai Tola, Patliputra Colony, Patna.
                                                                                                                                                            …........ Opposite parties

Learned Counsel for the complainant:-Mr. Nawal Kishore Singh, Advocate

            Before,

                  Miss. Gita Verma, Judicial Member (F)

      Mr. Raj Kumar Pandey, Member

ORDER

Per:Raj Kumar Pandey (Member)

Dated-05.09.2023

1. The complainant Priya Ranjan Shrivastava filed this consumer complaint seeking the following reliefs against the opposite parties:-

1.  To direct the opposite parties to give the possession of the flat bearing flat no.501 at Fifth floor having approximately 980 Sq. feet of super built up area and a car parking space in Parasambi’s Vihar Apartment at Gosai Tola, Patliputra Colony, Patna to the complainant forthwith complete in all respects and fully furnished.
2.        To Direct the opposite parties to pay the compensation of Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakh) only to the complainant for not giving the possession of flat no.501 at fifth floor approximately 980 Sq. ft. super built up area and a car parking space in Prasambi’s Saryug Vihar at Gosai Tola, Patliputra Colony, Patna within time i.e. September 2013 and for the inconvenience loss, harassment and mental & Physical agony suffered due to deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties.
3. To direct the opposite parties to give interest to the complainant @ 18% per annum compounded monthly on the amount of Rs.30,15,000/- (Rupees Thirty Lakh Fifteen Thousand) only which complainant has paid to the opposite parties for the said flat from the month of the October 2013 till the possession of the flat is given to the complainant.
4. To direct the opposite parties to pay Rs.12,00/- (Rupees Twelve Thousand only) per month from the month of October 2013 to January 2016 and Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen thousand) only per month from the February 2016 the possession of flat to the complainant as the complainant is paying the same as rent to his accommodation.
5.  To direct the opposite parties to pay Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one Lakh) only as legal cost to the complainant.

2.       After perusal of the order sheet it appears that  this consumer complaint case was filed on 09.05.2018. on 16.05.2018 this complaint case was placed before the Ld. Registrar of the State Commission and some minor defects were found; Despite, this complaint case was admitted by this State Commission on 21.05.2018 and direction was given to the complainant regarding taking steps for service of notice to the opposite parties. After a long interval on 14.01.2020 postal receipt was filed on behalf of the complainant regarding the service of notice to the opposite parties. On 20.04.2022 counsel for the complainant was present, but  no one was appeared for the opposite parties. As such the complainant was re-directed to take steps for service of notice to the Ops, by registered post with A.D. with due requisite, within a period of 3 weeks. Thereafter on next fixed date i.e. on 15.06.2022 no one was appeared on behalf of the complainant, hence direction was given to the complainant to comply the order dated 20.04.2022. Thereafter, five consecutive dates were fixed by this State Commission, but neither party was appeared. On 12.07.2023 the record was put up before the Bench and on that date a order was passed by the State Commission directing Office to inform the complainant on his mobile number given in the Vakalatnama and the next date was fixed on 25.07.2023. On that date the conducting lawyer of the complainant was informed on his mobile number by the Court Master. However, no one was appeared on behalf of the complainant. Hence, after giving much opportunity this complaint case was fixed for order.
3. As facts and circumstance stated above regarding this consumer complaint case, It has completely established that the conduct of the complainant had been not proper regarding “pairvi” of his complaint case. After admission of the complaint case, the complainant had failed to comply the order regarding notice to the opposite parties and no required procedure was fulfilled on behalf of the complainant. Hence only on the basis of complaint petition and relief sought there under, it is not possible to pass any cogent order. The conduct of the complainant shows that he has los his interest in this complaint case at very earlier stage, despite his conduct, so many opportunities were provided to the complainant by this State Commission but neither complainant nor his conducting lawyer paid heed towards this complaint case. 
4. As such the complaint case stands dismissed.
5. A copy of this order be supplied to both the parties free of cost as mandated by the C.P. Act 2019. Order be uploaded forthwith on the confonet of the State Commission.
6. Let the file be consigned in the record room along with copy of this order.   

   (Raj Kumar Pandey)                                                                                            (Gita Verma)                             

          Member                                                                                                    Judicial Member (F)

Mukund