(Per Mr.Dhanraj Khamatkar, Hon’ble Member)
(1) This appeal takes an exception to the order dated 13/07/2004 passed by the District Forum, Nashik in Consumer Complaint No.126/02.
(2) The facts leading to this appeal can be summarized as under:-
The original complainant/respondent became a member of the housing society on which appellants are office bearers. She had deposited an amount of `47,999/- for the tenement to be allotted by the appellant/original opponents. Despite of paying amount of `47,999/- the appellant did not give possession of the tenement. The original complainant waited for some time for getting possession. However, she did not get possession and hence she filed consumer complaint praying to direct the opponents to hand over the possession of the tenement failing which may be directed to pay an amount of `95,000/- along with interest @ 18% p.a. and 50,000/- for the mental torture. The opponent society contested the complaint on the ground that the complaint is not in limitation. They further contended that the complainant had not deposited an amount of `47,999/-. They further alleged that there is not deficiency in their service.
(3) District Forum, Nashik after hearing both the parties partly allowed the complaint and directed the present appellant/original opponent to pay an amount of `47,999/- along with 12% p.a. from 01/01/1991 till its realization and `500/- as cost of the complaint. Aggrieved by this order, the present appeal is filed.
(4) The matter was on sine-die list and put before us on 05/08/2011. We directed the office to issue notice to both the parties. Accordingly, the parties are intimated. Today, both the parties are absent. Since, the matter being old, we decided to proceed with the matter on merits.
(5) Admittedly, the respondent became member of the appellant society. Initially, the cost of the tenement was `55,000/-. Subsequently, it was raised upto `95,000/-. Admittedly, the respondent had deposited an amount of `47,999/-. However, the appellants have not handed over the possession of the tenement and refunded the amount paid by the respondent. Appellants have tried to raise the point of limitation, since the appellant failed to give possession of the tenement and the complainant has not received possession and hence cause of action is continuous. The appellants have neither given possession nor refunded the amount paid by the respondent and hence there is deficiency on the part of the appellant. The learned forum after taking into consideration the facts of the case has passed the order. We do not find any substance in the appeal filed by the appellants and the order passed by the District Forum, Nashik is just and sufficient. We hold accordingly and pass the following order.
ORDER
(1) Appeal is dismissed.
(2) Order passed by District Forum, Nashik is hereby confirmed.
(3) Inform the parties accordingly.
Pronounced on 30th September, 2011.
