Haryana

StateCommission

A/498/2016

ANSAL PROPERTIES AND INFRASTRUCTURE LTD. - Complainant(s)

Versus

SHWETA GUPTA - Opp.Party(s)

AJAY GHANGAS

20 Oct 2016

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, HARYANA, PANCHKULA.

 

First Appeal No.           498 of 2016

                                                Date of the Institution:           01.06.2016

                                                Date of Decision:-        20.10.2016

 

1.      Ansal Properties and Infrastructure Limited, Registered Office, 115 Ansal Bhawan, 16 KG Marg, New Delhi 110001 through its Authorized Representative Sh. Rakesh Malik.

 

2.      Ansal Properties and Infrastructure Limited, Europa Residency, Sushant City, Kundli through its Authorized Signatory Sh. Rakesh Malik.

                                      Appellants-Opposite Parties

Versus

 

Shweta Gupta daughter of Sh. Surinder Nath Singla, resident of Suraj Wollen Mills, 0-9, 0-12, Industrial Area, Near D.C. Office, Panipat.

Respondent-Complainant

 

 

CORAM:    Hon’ble Mr. Justice Nawab Singh, President.

                   Mr. B.M. Bedi, Judicial Member.

                    Mr. Diwan Singh Chauhan, Member.

 

Present:-    Shri Ajay Ghangas, Advocate for the appellants

                   Shri Sandeep Singh Ghangas, Advocate for the respondent.

 

 

O R D E R

 

 

NAWAB SINGH J, (ORAL)

 

          By filing this appeal, Ansal Properties & Infrastructure Limited-opposite parties (Builder) has challenged the order dated April 11^th, 2016 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Sonepat (for short, ‘District Forum’) whereby complaint filed by Shweta Gupta-complainant was allowed.  Builder was directed to pay interest on the deposited amount at the rate of 9% per annum with effect from May 01^st, 2013 till the handing over of the possession of the flat in question.  The builder was further directed to hand over the possession of the flat having area measuring 975 sq. feet in Block ‘B’ or ‘C’ to the complainant.

2.      Learned counsel for the builder interalia has urged that possession of the flat was to be handed over by May, 2013 but it could not be handed over.  The builder does not challenge the order so far as awarding of interest is concerned rather challenges the handing over of the possession of the 975 sq. feet flat in Block ‘B’ or ‘C’ on the ground that in the project of the builder, there is no flat measuring 975 sq. feet.  The flats available are of 1265.825 sq. feet.  The size of the flat was changed because of change in the reallocation plan by the concerned authorities. 

3.      In face of it, learned counsel for the respondent-complainant has urged that the complainant has already paid the amount of the flat measuring 1265.825 sq. ft. to Ansal Properties & Infrastructure Limited-Builder.

4.      In this view of the matter, the impugned order is modified to the extent that Ansal Properties & Infrastructure Limited is directed to pay interest at the rate of 9% per annum on the deposited amount with effect from September 01^st, 2013 till delivery of the flat measuring 1265.825 sq. ft. and Rs.20,000/- litigation expenses to the complainant. Accordingly, the appeal stands disposed of in the manner indicated above.

5.      The statutory amount of Rs.25000/- deposited at the time of filing the appeal be refunded to the complainant against proper receipt and identification in accordance with rules, after the expiry of period of appeal/revision, if any.

 

 

Announced 20.10.2016

(Diwan Singh Chauhan) Member

(B.M. Bedi) Judicial Member

(Nawab Singh) President