Delhi

StateCommission

A/428/2015

COL. SUNIL NAUTIYAL - Complainant(s)

Versus

TASHEE LAND DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. - Opp.Party(s)

26 Feb 2016

ORDER

IN THE STATE COMMISSION: DELHI

(Constituted under Section 9 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986)

                                                                   Date of Arguments: 26.02.2016

Date of Decision: 02.03.2016

 

First Appeal No. 428/2015

(Arising out of the order dated 07.08.2015 passed in Complaint Case No. 518/2014 by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, ‘M’ Block, Ist Floor, Vikas Bhawan, I.P.Estate, New Delhi-110002)

In the matter of:

Col. Sunil Nautiyal

S/o Sh. J.P.Nautiyal

R/o A-502, Sanmati Kunj Apartments

Plot No. 19 A, Sector-06

Dwarka

New Delhi-110075                                                                   .........Appellant

 

Versus

 

Tashee Land Developers Pvt. Ltd.

Having its office at:-

517 A, 5^TH Floor

Narain Manzil

23 Barakhamba Road, Connaught Place

New Delhi-110001

Through its Managing Director

Mr. K.N.Shukla                                                                ..........Respondent                                                                

CORAM

O P GUPTA                              -                  MEMBER (JUDICIAL)

 

1.         Whether reporters of local newspaper be allowed to see the judgment? Yes

2.         To be referred to the reporter or not? Yes

 

O P GUPTA -  MEMBER (JUDICIAL)

 

JUDGEMENT

1.      The present appeal is directed against the order dated 07.08.2015 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-VI, New Delhi in Complaint Case No. 518/2014. The appellant was complainant before the District Forum. OP gave a statement that he would restore the unit allotted to complainant after giving up interest levid for delay and adjusting excess money towards principal and complainant would continue payment as per schedule. Complainant was given liberty to approach Forum on taking possession on settlement of dues of account. Signatures of both the parties were obtained on order sheet and copy of cheque was kept on record.
2.      Now the grievance of the appellant is that cannon of jurisprudence want that any Forum vested with judicious power, which is seized of any dispute must afford reasonable opportunity to the parties to bring on record their side of the story and only after being satisfied, should pronounce judgement on merits.
3.      It is sufficient to mention that no appeal lies against compromise. The appellant should not have signed the proceedings if he was not agreeable.
4.      Moreover the counsel for the respondent pointed that three complaints were settled on the same date i.e. 07.08.2015. One was the present case, second was of Mrs. Surbhi Obeja and third was Mr. Ravinder Singh. In all the three matters appeals were filed.  Appeal of third matter was assigned and listed in Bench No. I and was registered as First Appeal No. 429/2015. The same was dismissed vide order dated 29.09.2015 on the same reasoning that no appeal lies against compromise order.
5.      The appeal fails and is dismissed.
6.      Copy of the order be sent to both the parties free of costs. One copy of the order be sent to District Forum for information.
7.      FDR, if any, deposited by the appellant be released as per rules.

 

(O P GUPTA)

MEMBER (JUDICIAL)