Karnataka

StateCommission

CC/54/2024

NILADRI SHEKAR DUTTA - Complainant(s)

Versus

SIPANI PROPERTIES PRIVATE LIMITED - Opp.Party(s)

ANKUR TRIPATHI

20 Nov 2024

ORDER

KARNATAKA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
BASAVA BHAVAN, BANGALORE.
 
Complaint Case No. CC/54/2024
( Date of Filing : 15 Aug 2024 )
 
1. NILADRI SHEKAR DUTTA
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS S/O LATE MR. SIBA PRASAD DUTTA 128 BARASAT ROAD BARRACKPORE NONACHANDANPUKUR , NORTH 24 PARGANAS, WEST BENGAL 700122
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. SIPANI PROPERTIES PRIVATE LIMITED
THROUGH ITS DIRECTOR NO. 439, 18TH MAIN, 6TH BLOCK, KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE 560095
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. Ravishankar PRESIDING MEMBER
 HON'BLE MRS. Smt.Sunita Channabasappa Bagewadi MEMBER
 
PRESENT:
 
Dated : 20 Nov 2024
Final Order / Judgement

20.11.2024

ORDER ON ADMISSION

MR. RAVISHANKAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER

                The learned advocate for complainant submits that he had sought for refund of the entire Sale Consideration amount to the tune of Rs.96,86,839/- along with interest @of 18% and also sought for Bank interest paid to the tune of Rs.8,50,150/-,  compensation of Rs.30,00,000/-,  interior modification amount of Rs.8,55,552/- and Rs.10,00,000/- towards cost of the furniture with 18% interest, Rs.15,00,000/- towards Arrears of rental income, Rs.10,00,000/- for Mental agony and an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- towards Legal expenses and submits that the complainant entered into an agreement of sale of the apartment No.C1206, 12th Floor, Wing C at “Sipani Viveza” in the year 18.06.2022 and Sale deed was also executed on 30.09.2023.  After execution of the sale deed, he was unable to take the possession of the said apartment since the apartment was ceased and the main door lock has been changed without any prior communication.  Therefore, it was not let him to take possession hence sought for refund of the entire consideration amount. 

        2.     Perused the certified copy of the order memorandum of appeal.  After bear reading of the averments, it appears that the allegations made by complainant is Civil in nature.  Further, The sale deed was already executed in favour of Complainant and once the sale deed was executed, the refund of the sale consideration amount is not permissible until and unless sale deed was declared as void.

        3.     This Commission was established for the purpose of adjudicating the Consumer Disputes only.  Here, in this matter the entire allegation does not disclose the Consumer Dispute.  When the complainant sought for refund of the sale consideration amount, they have to approach Civil Court and not before this Commission.  This Consumer Commission has no power of Civil Judges to entertain the present complaint.  As such the complaint is dismissed as not maintainable.  Accordingly,

O R D E R

The Complaint is disposed.No order as to costs.

Forward the free copies of this order to both parties.

 

(Sunita .C. Bagewadi)                               (Ravishankar)

 Member                                              Judicial Member

ARD*

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Ravishankar]
PRESIDING MEMBER
 
 
[HON'BLE MRS. Smt.Sunita Channabasappa Bagewadi]
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.