BEFORE THE KARNATAKA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BANGALORE. (ADDL. BENCH)
DATED THIS THE 21st DAY OF JUNE, 2023
APPEAL NOS.1860/2022 AND 1861/2022
PRESENT
SRI RAVI SHANKAR – JUDICIAL MEMBER
SMT. SUNITA C.BAGEWADI – MEMBER
1. APPEAL NO.1860/2022 & 1861/2022
1. Karnataka Telecom Department
Employees Co-Operative Society
Amims Castel No.706, 1st Floor
CBI Road, HMT Layout, … Appellant/s
RT Nagar post, Bengaluru-560 032
Rept. By its President
Sri.V.J.K.Bakthavakchalam
2. Karnataka Telecom Department
Employees Co-Operative Society
Amims Castel No.706, 1st Floor
CBI Road, HMT Layout,
RT Nagar post, Bengaluru-560 032
Rept. By its Secretary
Sri.B.S.Manjunath
(By Sri.D.S.Lokesh, Advocate)
(Appellants are same in both appeals).
-Versus-
1. Appeal No.1860/2022
Sri.T.Ravi Kiran … Respondent/s
S/o V.R.Thimmegowda,
Aged about 45 years,
R/at Ashirwad, 1st Cross,
2nd Main, Kuvempunagar,
Tumkur-572 103
(By Sri.G.S.Ravishankar, Advocate)
2. Appeal No.1861/2022
Sri.M.S.Jayaprakash
S/o M.S.Kumar,
Aged about 73 years,
Nandi, No.967, 24th Cross,
SIT Extension,
Tumkur-572 103
(By Sri.G.S.Ravishankar, Advocate)
COMMON ORDER
BY SRI RAVISHANKAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER
The Opposite Parties/Appellants preferred these appeals against the order passed by the District Consumer Commission, Bengaluru (Urban) dated 1-8-2022 in Complaint Nos.157/2020 and 158/2020 which directed these appellants to refund Rs.1,96,800/- in both appeals with interest @9% p.a. from the date of respective payment till realization and litigation cost of Rs.10,000/- to the complainants within 60 days. Failing which, the appellants shall pay interest @11% p.a. after expiry of 60 days from this date till realization and submits the complainants become members of this Opposite Party society and applied for allotment of sites measuring 30X40ft. in Sukhananda Sagara layout and Nityananda Sagara layout at Belavadi village, Mysore and they have paid total sum of Rs. 1,96,800/- in both appeals. After payment of the said amount, the complainants requested for allotment of the sites, but the Opposite Parties deliberately not allotted the sites and postpone the allotment of sites for the one or the other reason. The complainants made several representations either to allot the site or to refund the amount paid. But the Opposite Party kept quiet without considering the requests made by the complainants. Subsequently, the complainants issued legal notice and called upon the Opposite Party to refund the amount paid towards allotment along with interest and even in spite of legal notice the Opposite Party not replied the legal notice. Subsequently, the complainants filed these complaints alleging deficiency in service and sought for relief of the refund.
2. After trial, the District Consumer Commission allowed the complaints and directed these appellants to refund the above said amount. In fact, the complainants become the members for allotment of sites measuring 30 X 40ft.sq. in the layout named “Sukhananda Sagar layout and Nityananda Sagar layout” at Belavadi village, Mysore. The Opposite Party society has acquired 98 acres of land for conversion and did Bhoomi Pooja in the year 2007. The appellant society has allotted the sites on the basis of seniority. The formation of the site is time consuming and requires approval from various Government Authorities. The delay in formation of the sites are not due to any intentional, it is only due to approval from the side of authorities. Hence, they could not allot the sites and register the same in the name of complainants. The complainants have not paid the balance amount in both appeals. The complainants are not come forward to the pay the said amount. In spite of that they had filed false complaints alleging deficiency in service. The District Commission without considering the said defence has allowed the complaints and directed these Opposite Parties to refund the amount with interest. In fact they ready to allot the sites, hence prayed for set aside the order passed by the District Commission and dismiss the complaint, in the interest of justice and equity.
3. Heard from both sides.
4. On perusal of the memorandum of appeal, certified copy of the order passed by the District consumer Commission, it is noticed that the complainants have paid an amount of Rs.1,96,800/- in both appeals. The complainants constrained to file the complaints for allotment and registration of the sites. This appellant had not shown any material to show that subsequent layout is developed and ready for registration. In the absence of such materials, we cannot believe the arguments submitted by the learned advocate for appellant. When the layout was not developed in spite of sufficient time taken, the complainants are entitled to get refund of the amount paid towards the allotment of sites. The District Commission after considering the evidence had directed these appellants to refund the amount paid with interest along with compensation to the complainants. The order passed by the District Commission is in accordance with law. We do not find any merits in the appeals. As such the appeals are dismissed and the order passed by the District Commission is confirmed. Accordingly, we proceed to pass the following:
O R D E R
The appeals Nos.1860/2022 and 1861/2022 are hereby dismissed. No order as to costs.
The impugned order 1-8-2022 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Bengaluru (Urban) in CC.No.157/2020 and 158/2020 is confirmed.
The amount in deposit shall be transmitted to the concerned District Commission to pay the same to the complainants.
The original of this order shall be kept in appeal No.1860/2022 and a copy thereof shall be kept in Appeal No.1861/2022.
Send a copy of this order to both parties as well as concerned District Consumer Commission.
Member Judicial Member
