Haryana

StateCommission

A/1058/2015

OMAXE LTD. - Complainant(s)

Versus

SURENDER KUMAR RANA - Opp.Party(s)

MUNISH GUPTA

17 Feb 2016

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION HARYANA, PANCHKULA

                                               

 

First Appeal No  :            1058 of 2015

Date of Institution:           10.12.2015

Date of Decision :            17.02.2016

 

 

M/s Omaxe Limited, Omaxe House, 7, Local Shopping Complex, Kalkaji, New Delhi.

 

Through its Authorized Representative namely Sh. Parveen Kumar Gupta, M/s Omaxe Limited, 7, Local Shopping Complex, Kalkaji, New Delhi-110019.

                                      Appellant-Opposite Party

Versus

 

Surender Kumar Rana son of Sh. Ram Singh Kanwar, resident of 388, Sector 12, Urban Estate, Panipat at present resident of House No.5823, Block –D1, Ansal Sushant City, Panipat.

                                      Respondent-Complainant

 

 

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

                             Mr. B.M. Bedi, Judicial Member.

                                                                                                                   

Present:              Shri Bhupender Singh, proxy counsel for Shri Munish Gupta, Advocate for appellant.

Shri Surender Kumar Rana, respondent-complainant in person.

 

                                                   O R D E R

 

NAWAB SINGH J.(ORAL)

 

          The instant appeal has been preferred by M/s Omaxe Limited – opposite party against the order dated October 15^th, 2015 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Jhajjar (for short District Forum) whereby complaint filed by Surender Kumar Rana-complainant was disposed of. Operative part of the order is reproduced as under:-

                   “….Therefore, we find no merit in the complaint filed by the complainant.  But as is averred by the complainant through this complaint that the amount raised by the respondent from the complainant is beyond the capacity of complainant to pay, therefore, in the interest of justice, we direct the respondent to charge from the complainant the due amount of installments without any interest and penalty etc. The complaint stands disposed of accordingly.”

 

2.      Complainant applied for allotment of a flat in the project Petronas Towers, Bahadurgarh of opposite party.  He paid Rs.3,40,767/- to the opposite party.  The complainant requested the opposite party to refund the deposited amount but they did not pay any heed.

3.      Learned counsel for the opposite party has urged that opposite party was proceeded ex parte before the District Forum. So, an opportunity be granted to contest the complaint on merits. 

4.      In face of it, complainant has fairly conceded that he has no objection in granting opportunity to the opposite party to contest the complaint on merits.

5.      In view of above, the appeal is accepted and the impugned order is set aside. The file be sent back and District Forum shall decide it after giving opportunity to file reply and contest it to the opposite party-appellant.

6.       The parties are directed to appear before the District Forum on March 08^th, 2016.

7.      Copy of this order be sent to the District Forum.

 

 

Announced: 17.02.2016

(B.M. Bedi) Judicial Member

(Nawab Singh) President

 

UK