Uttar Pradesh

StateCommission

A/2002/2485

Moradabad Development Authority - Complainant(s)

Versus

Smt. Maya Saxena - Opp.Party(s)

Rajesh Tewari & Abhishek Mishra

27 Jan 2023

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, UP
C-1 Vikrant Khand 1 (Near Shaheed Path), Gomti Nagar Lucknow-226010
 
First Appeal No. A/2002/2485
( Date of Filing : 07 Oct 2002 )
(Arisen out of Order Dated 04/09/2002 in Case No. C/452/996 of District Muradabad-II)
 
1. Moradabad Development Authority
Moradabad
...........Appellant(s)
Versus
1. Smt. Maya Saxena
Moradabad
...........Respondent(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. SUSHIL KUMAR PRESIDING MEMBER
 HON'BLE MR. Vikas Saxena JUDICIAL MEMBER
 
PRESENT:
 
Dated : 27 Jan 2023
Final Order / Judgement

ORAL

State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission

U.P. Lucknow.

Appeal No.2485 of 2002

Moradabad Development Authority,

Moradabad through its Secretary.                         ...Appellant.

Versus

Smt. Maya Saxena C/o Dr. S.C. Saxena,

House No.148 U.P. Avas Vikas, Pili Kothi,

Civil Lines, Moradabad.                                   …Respondent.

Present:-

1- Hon’ble Sri Sushil Kumar, Presiding Member.

2- Hon’ble Sri Vikas Saxena, Member.

Sri Abhishek Mishra, Advocate for appellant.

None for the respondent.

Date 27.1.2023

JUDGMENT

Per Sri Sushil Kumar,  Member- This appeal has been filed against the judgment and order dated 4.9.2002 passed by the ld. District Forum-II, Moradabad in complaint case no.452 of 1996, whereby the appellant is directed to pay Rs.88,000.00 deposited by the complainant alongwith interest @12% p.a.

          We have perused the judgment and order passed by the ld. District Forum and heard ld. counsel for the appellant only. None present for the respondent.

          On perusal of the record, it appears that the complainant herself requested to get refund of the amount deposited by her. Therefore, there is no liability can be imposed upon the appellant/authority to pay interest @12%.Therefore, this judgment and order deserves to be amended upto this extent that the appellant authority is not liable to pay interest.

ORDER

          Appeal is allowed partially. The impugned judgment and order is amended to the extent that the interest shall not be paid by the appellant authority. Rest part of the judgment is confirmed.  

          The stenographer is requested to upload this order on the Website of this Commission today itself. 

 

(3)

          Certified copy of this judgment be provided to the parties as per rules.       

 

        (Vikas Saxena)                                (Sushil Kumar)

              Member                                  Presiding Member

Judgment dated/typed signed by us and pronounced in the open court.

Consign to record.

 

        (Vikas Saxena)                                (Sushil Kumar)

              Member                                  Presiding Member

Jafr, PA I

Court 3

 

 

 

 

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. SUSHIL KUMAR]
PRESIDING MEMBER
 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Vikas Saxena]
JUDICIAL 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.