BEFORE THE KARNATAKA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BANGALORE. (ADDL. BENCH)

DATED THIS THE 21^st DAY OF JUNE, 2023

APPEAL NOS. 1178/2022 AND 1179/2022

PRESENT

SRI RAVI SHANKAR – JUDICIAL MEMBER

SMT. SUNITA C.BAGEWADI – MEMBER

1.      APPEAL NO.1178/2022 & 1179/2022

    1.      M/s. Karnataka Telecom Department

            Employees Co-Operative Society

            Amims Castel No.706, 1^st Floor

Near CBI Road, HMT Layout,

RT Nagar post, Bengaluru-560 032

Rept. By its President/Secretary

Sri.V.J.K.Bakthavakchalam

S/o late Sri.Kannaiah Naidu.V,

                                                                     … Appellant/s

  2.      Sri.B.S.Manjunath

S/o late Subba Rao,

Secretary of Karnataka Telecom

Department Employees Co-Operative

Society, Amims Castel No.706, 1^st Floor

Near CBI Road, HMT Layout,

RT Nagar post, Bengaluru-560 032

(By Sri.D.S.Lokesh, Advocate)

(Appellants are same in both appeals).
                                  

                                          -Versus-

1.      Appeal No.1178/2022

Smt.Vatsala R.Kulkarni,

W/o R.N.Kulkarni                                    … Respondent/s

Aged about 74 years,

R/at No.671, 13^th Main,

14^th Stage, TK Layout,

Mysuru-570 0023

(By Sri.Narendra.D.V.Gowda, Advocate)

2.      Appeal No.1179/2022

Sri.R.N.Kulkarni

S/o late N.S.Kulkarni

Aged about 80 years,

R/at No.671, 13^th Main,

14^th Stage, TK Layout,

Mysuru-570 0023

Since dead by his LRs of

Deceased Respondent:

1(a). Smt.Vatsala R.Kulkarni

          W/o late R.N.Kulkarni

          Aged about 76 years,

R/at No.671, 13^th Main,

14^th Stage, TK Layout,

Mysuru-570 0023

  1(b).  Sri.Rohan R.Kulkarni

            S/o late R.N.Kulkarni,

            Aged about 51 years,

            Permanent R/at No.25481,

            Carrinington Dr, Chantily,

VA – 20152, United States of America,

1 (c).    Smt.Parineeta R.Kulkarni,

            D/o late R.N.Kulkarni,

            W/o Sri.Sanjay.V.Angadi,

Aged 43 years,

Permanent R/at 1052, Granite Dr,

McDonald, PA 15057

United States of America

Temporarily R/at

No.671, 13^th Main,

4^th Stage, TK Layout,

Mysuru-570 023

          (By Sri.Narendra.D.V.Gowda, Advocate)

COMMON ORDER

BY SRI RAVISHANKAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER

The Opposite Parties/Appellants preferred these Appeals against the order passed by the District Consumer Commission, Bengaluru (Urban) dated 21-5-2022 in Complaint No.1051/2020 and 1052/2020 which directed these Appellants to pay a sum of Rs.10,85,020/- in both appeals with interest @8% p.a. from 6.3.2009 and 5.3.2009 till realization. Further directed to pay a sum of Rs.20,000/-in both appeals towards litigation expenses to the complainants within 30 days. In the event of Opposite Parties fail to pay the said amount of Rs.20,000/- within 30 days, the same shall carry interest @ 8% p.a. from the date of order till realization and submits the complainants become members of these Opposite Parties society and applied for allotment of sites measuring 50 X 80ft. at Huyilalu village, Ilwala Hobli, Mysuru Taluk, Mysuru District in “Nithaanandha Sagara Layout and they have paid total sum of Rs.10,85,020/- in both appeals. After payment of the said amount, the complainants requested for allotment of the sites, but the Opposite Parties deliberately not allotted the sites and postpone the allotment of sites for the one or the other reason. The complainants made several representations either to allot the site or to refund the amount paid. But the Opposite Parties kept quiet without considering the requests made by the complainants. Subsequently, the complainants issued legal notice and called upon the Opposite Parties to refund the amount paid towards allotment along with interest and even in spite of legal notice the Opposite Parties not replied the legal notice. Subsequently, the complainants filed these complaints alleging deficiency in service and sought for relief of the refund.  

2. After trial, the District Consumer Commission allowed the complaints and directed these appellants to pay the above said amount. In fact, the complainants become the members for allotment of sites measuring 50 X 80 to be formed in Huyilalu village under the layout named “Nithaanandha Sagara Layout” at Mysuru district. In the year 2008 the Opposite Party society had performed the Bhoomi Pooja in the said layout and processed to acquire land and registered the land around 250 acres and remaining 50 acres under agreement stage. Due to land owners and developers the execution of the sale deed were delayed. These appellants had applied for conversion for change of land to MUDA for doing the layout work and they were ready to give site as per seniority of the complainant by the Board of Directors and have not any malafide intention of cheating the members of the society. These appellants have no money to refund to the complainant as they have invested the money on the lands purchased to form layout. The formation of the site is time consuming and requires approval from various Government Authorities. The delay in formation of the sites are not due to any intentional, it is only due to approval from the side of authorities. Hence, they could not allot the sites and register the same in the name of complainants. The site value of the said layout is more than two times over and above the amount deposited by the complainants. The complainants will be allotted the sites and they can get benefits out of it. The complainants are yet to pay Rs.2,96,000/- for the purpose of registration. The complainants are not come forward to the pay the said amount. In spite of that they had filed false complaints alleging deficiency in service. The District Commission without considering the said defence has allowed the complaints and directed these Opposite Parties to refund the amount with interest. In fact they ready to allot the sites, hence prayed for set aside the order passed by the District Commission and dismiss the complaint, in the interest of justice and equity.            

3. Heard from both sides.

4. On perusal of the memorandum of appeal, certified copy of the order passed by the District consumer Commission, it is noticed that the complainants paid an amount of Rs.10,84,000/- and Rs.10,85,020/- in both appeals. The complainants constrained to file the complaints for allotment and registration of the sites. These appellants had not shown any material to show that subsequent layouts are developed and ready for registration. In the absence of such materials, we cannot believe the arguments submitted by the learned advocate for appellants. When the layout was not developed in spite of sufficient time taken, the complainants are entitled to get refund of the amount paid towards the allotment of sites. The District Commission after considering the evidence had directed these appellants to refund the amount paid with interest along with compensation to the complainants. The order passed by the District Commission is in accordance with law. We do not find any merits in the appeals. As such the appeals are dismissed and the order passed by the District Commission is confirmed. Accordingly, we proceed to pass the following:               

O R D E R

The appeals Nos.1178/2022 and 1179/2022 are hereby dismissed.

The impugned order 21-5-2022 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Bengaluru (Urban) in CC.No.1051/2020 and 1052/2020 is confirmed.

The amount in deposit shall be transmitted to the concerned District Commission to pay the same to the complainants.

The original of this order shall be kept in appeal No.1178/2022 and a copy thereof shall be kept in Appeal No.1179/2022.  

Send a copy of this order to both parties as well as concerned District Consumer Commission.

Member                                                         Judicial Member