Chandigarh

DF-II

MA/48/2018

R.K. Sharma - Complainant(s)

Versus

Sahara India Pariwar Housing Unit - Opp.Party(s)

07 Oct 2022

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION-II, U.T. CHANDIGARH

MA/48/2018 IN (E.A. No.149 of 2008) CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO.539 OF  2006

R. K. SHARMA VS. SAHARA INDIA PARIWAR HOUSING      UNIT & ORS.

BEFORE:

HON’BLE SMT.PRITI MALHOTRA         PRESIDING MEMBER                   HON’BLE SH.B.M.SHARMA                          MEMBER

ARGUED BY:       Sh.R.K.Sharma, Decree Holder in person                                 Sh.Ammish Goel, Advocate for JDs.

Dated : 7th October,  2022

O R D E R

PER PRITI MALHOTRA, PRESIDING MEMBER

 

         The complaint (No.539 of 2006), filed by the complainant, was allowed by District Forum-I, U.T., Chandigarh vide its order dated 9.9.2007, directing the Opposite Parties in Para No.9 of the above mentioned order, as under:-

“….we allow the complaint and direct the OPs to refund Rs.1,00,000/- (One lakh) as deposited by the complainant and also to pay him compensation to the tune of Rs.5,00,000/- (Five lakh) alongwith Rs.2100/- as cost of litigation. The order shall be complied with within 30 days from the date of its receipt, failing which the decreetal amount shall carry a penal interest @9% per annum from the date of order till its realization.”

2]      Against the above said order, the Opposite Parties preferred an Appeal No.670 of 2007 before the Hon’ble State Commission, UT, Chandigarh, which was dismissed with costs of Rs.10,000/- vide order dated 14.7.2008, against which the Opposite Parties filed R.P.No.3534 of 2008 before the Hon’ble National Commission, New Delhi. The Hon’ble National Commission, New Delhi vide its order dated 28.4.2014 set aside the  order dated 14.7.2008 and remanded the matter back to the Hon’ble State Commission, UT, Chandigarh for decision afresh in accordance with law, after hearing both the parties.  Thereafter, the Hon’ble State Commission, UT, Chandigarh vide order dated 9.6.2014, while partly accepting the appeal, modified the impugned order passed by the District Forum, to the following effect:-

“In view of above discussion, the appeal is partly accepted, with no order as to costs. The impugned order, passed by the District Forum, is modified, to the extent, indicated hereunder;

(i)      The appellants/Opposite Parties are directed to refund an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lac Only) to the respondent/complainant alongwith interest @9% per annum from the date of deposit, within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the order;

(ii)    The appellants/Opposite Parties are directed to pay an amount of Rs.70,000/- to the respondent/complainant, claimed by him, as compensation for unfair trade practice and causing physical harassment and mental agony to him, instead of Rs.5 lacs awarded by the District Forum, within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the order;

(iii)   The appellants/Opposite Parties, are directed to pay an amount of Rs.2,100/- to the respondent/complainant, as cost of litigation, as awarded by the District Forum, within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order;

(iv)    This order shall be complied with, by the respondents/Opposite Parties, within the stipulated period, failing which, they shall be liable to pay the amounts, mentioned in Clauses (i) and (ii), above, alongwith interest @12% per annum from the date of default, till the date of actual payment to   the respondent/complainant, besides paying the litigation costs, as aforesaid.

(v)     All other directions given, and reliefs granted by the District Forum, in the impugned order, subject to the modification, aforesaid, which are contrary to, and, in variance of this order, shall stand set aside.

 

3]      It is clear from Receipt dated 29.08.2008 issued by the complainant (Ann.C-3) that he had already received an amount of Rs.6,02,100/- through Cheque No.320959, dated 29.9.2008, on account of proceeds deposited by Sahara India Priwar/OPs.

         The complainant, per order of Hon’ble State Commission, UT, Chandigarh dated 9.6.2014, reproduced above, was entitled to get an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- towards principal plus interest thereon to the tune of Rs.33,750/- (@9% p.a. w.e.f. 31.12.2004 to 29.9.2008).  Thus the complainant was entitled to get principal amount as well as interest thereon totaling to Rs.1,33,750/- (Rs.1,00,000+33,750/-).

        Apart this, he was also entitled to get compensation amount of Rs.70,000/- and litigation cost of Rs.2100/-.

         Therefore, the complainant was in total entitled to get an amount of Rs.2,05,850/- (100000+33,750+70,000+2100/- referred to above) from OPs.

        Thus it is clear that the complainant, who was entitled to get an amount of Rs.2,05,850/- was in receipt of excess amount of Rs.6,02,100/- from the OPs by the date of order i.e. 9.6.2014. Therefore, the complainant was liable to refund the balance/excess amount and as such he has been called upon to do so, whereupon the complainant instead deposited over & above a total sum of Rs.7,60,540/- by way of three drafts of Rs.10,000/-, Rs.3,94,000/- and Rs.3,56,540/- as is clear from order dated 30.10.2018 (Ann.A-1) and it also an undisputed fact between the parties.

4]       In the above given scenario, it is observed that the complainant was in receipt of amount over & above than awarded decree per order dated 9.6.2014, therefore, the balance amount needs to be refunded to OPs.  However, the OPs cannot be granted the whole amount deposited by the complainant.

         Therefore, we direct the Office that the balance amount of Rs.3,96,250/- (Rs.6,02,100/- an amount deposited by OPs & paid to complainant minus Rs.2,05,850/- an amount to which complainant was entitled for) along with simple savings bank interest @4% p.a. from the date of payment/receipt i.e. 29.9.2008 till the date of this order i.e. 7.10.2022, be refunded to the Opposite Parties out of the total deposited amount of Rs.7,60,540/- plus interest, if any, accrued thereupon, and the balance amount, if any, arrived at, after making payment to OPs, as aforesaid, be refunded to the complainant. Neither of the parties can be adversely affected for the period of pending litigation. The present application stands disposed of accordingly.

         It is pertinent to mention here that the ld.Counsel for the OPs has agreed for deduction & release of an amount of Rs. 1,40,801/- to the complainant, being admitted liability towards the complainant in connected case i.e. EA No.80/2019 – Sangita Sharma Vs. Sahara India Pariwar Housing Units & Anr., from the balance amount of OPs, if arrived at in the present application. In this view of the matter, the Office is directed to release an amount of Rs. 1,40,801/- from the due amount of OPs, if arrived at towards the OPs. In case no amount or insufficient amount is found to the balance of OPs in the present application, then the OPs shall make payment of the above said entire or balance amount to the complainant forthwith.

         Certified copy of this order be communicated to the parties free of cost. After compliance file be consigned.

Announced

7^th October, 2022                                                           sd/-   

 (PRITI MALHOTRA)

PRESIDING MEMBER

 

Sd/-

(B.M.SHARMA)

MEMBER