D.D.A. Vs. G.S. Chatwal and Others

D.D.A. vs G.S. Chatwal and Others

Type Court Judgment Court Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi Decided Aug 29, 1996

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1114045

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1114045
Court: Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi
Judge: A.P. Chowdhri, President &Amp; the Honourable Ms. Justice S. Brar, Member
Decided On: Aug 29, 1996
Case Number: Case No. A-195 of 1994
Subject: Land Acquisition

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Consumer Protection Act, 1986 - Section 15 - Comparative Citation: 1996 (3) CPJ 80

Key legal issue: Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

D.D.A.

Respondent

G.S. Chatwal and Others

Excerpt

consumer protection act, 1986 - section 15 - comparative citation: 1996 (3) cpj 80.....interest @ 24% p.a. on the total amount becoming payable under the order. the d.d.a. is in appeal. 4. mr. r.m. goyal, counsel, had been appearing for the appellant. we were informed that mr. r.m. goyal is no more on the panel of lawyers for d.d.a. the other panel lawyer mr. s.c. varshney was present. he prayed for adjournment which was declined as sufficient time has elapsed. since mr. r.m. goyal, counsel stopped appearing for d.d.a. and it was clearly open to the d.d.a. to have made arrangements for its due representation before the commission. 5. the present appeal is accompanied by an application for condonation of delay. we have gone through the record and have heard mr. s.l. bhargav. in the facts and circumstances of the case the delay in filing the present appeal is condoned. 6.we are of the view that the present case is directly covered by the decision of this commission in the case of mr. s.l. bhargav. we, therefore, find no merit in the appeal and accordingly dismiss the same. as the time of 60 days allowed by the d.f. has elapsed, we allow a fresh period of 60 days from the date of receipt a copy of this order in the office of the d.d.a. to refund the amount to the seven respondents of rs. 100/- each together with 10% interest thereon from the date of deposit till date of refund. direction of the d.f. to pay a further interest @ 24% is, however, set aside. the parties are left to bear their own costs in the appeal. a copy of this order be communicated to both the sides, as well as d.f.-ii. appeal dismissed.

Full Judgment

A.P. Chowdhri, President:

1. Brief facts giving rise to this appeal may be stated as follows :

2.The seven respondents are allottees of D.D.A. flats in Prasad Nagar, New Delhi. The supply of water was taken over by D.D.A. The Executive Engineer asked the respondents as well as other allottees of D.D.A. flats to deposit Rs. 100/- each as water security. The amounts were deposited. One Mr. S.L. Bhargav challenged the deposit as not warranted by law. He filed a complaint before the D.F. By order dated 3.7.90 the D.F. directed the opposite party D.D.A. to refund the said amount of Rs. 100/-. No interest or compensation was allowed. Aggrieved by the order the complainant, Mr. S.L. Bhargav, filed appeal No. A-113/90. The appeal was allowed by this Commission by its order dated 13.11.90. This Commission allowed 10% interest on the amount of security from the date of deposit till it was refunded. Against the order of this Commission D.D.A.s revision petition was dismissed on 12.9.91 and against the order of the N.C. the Supreme Court dismissed the S.L.P. on 9.5.95.

3. Basing their claim on the decision of Mr. S.L. Bhargav the seven respondents instituted a fresh complaint before the D.F. through Mr. S.L. Bhargav as authorised representative. The D.F., by its order dated 22.10.93, allowed the complaint and directed the D.D.A. to refund Rs. 100/- to each of the respondents together with 10% interest within 60 days from the date of the order. In case of default the D.D.A. was further directed to pay interest @ 24% p.a. on the total amount becoming payable under the order. The D.D.A. is in appeal.

4. Mr. R.M. Goyal, Counsel, had been appearing for the appellant. We were informed that Mr. R.M. Goyal is no more on the panel of Lawyers for D.D.A. The other panel Lawyer Mr. S.C. Varshney was present. He prayed for adjournment which was declined as sufficient time has elapsed. Since Mr. R.M. Goyal, Counsel stopped appearing for D.D.A. and it was clearly open to the D.D.A. to have made arrangements for its due representation before the Commission.

5. The present appeal is accompanied by an application for condonation of delay. We have gone through the record and have heard Mr. S.L. Bhargav. In the facts and circumstances of the case the delay in filing the present appeal is condoned.

6.We are of the view that the present case is directly covered by the decision of this Commission in the case of Mr. S.L. Bhargav. We, therefore, find no merit in the appeal and accordingly dismiss the same. As the time of 60 days allowed by the D.F. has elapsed, we allow a fresh period of 60 days from the date of receipt a copy of this order in the office of the D.D.A. to refund the amount to the seven respondents of Rs. 100/- each together with 10% interest thereon from the date of deposit till date of refund. Direction of the D.F. to pay a further interest @ 24% is, however, set aside. The parties are left to bear their own costs in the appeal. A copy of this order be communicated to both the sides, as well as D.F.-II.

Appeal dismissed.

Same Court & Year Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New ... Same Parties D.D.A. vs G.S. Chatwal and Others Same Subject Land Acquisition Same Judge A.P. Chowdhri, President &Amp; the Honourable Ms. Justice S. ...

Land Acquisition