Delhi Development Authority Vs. D.C. GuptA.

Delhi Development Authority vs D.C. GuptA.

Type Court Judgment Court Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi Decided Nov 02, 1995

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1114139

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/1114139
Court: Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi
Judge: A.P. Chowdhri, President; the Honourable Ms. Justice S. Brar Member &Amp; Desh Bandhu, Member
Decided On: Nov 02, 1995
Case Number: Case No. A-488 of 1995
Subject: Land Acquisition

Case Summary

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

Consumer Protection Act, 1986 - Section 15 - Comparative Citation: 1996 (1) CPJ 350

Key legal issue: Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Delhi Development Authority

Respondent

D.C. GuptA.

Excerpt

consumer protection act, 1986 - section 15 - comparative citation: 1996 (1) cpj 350a.p. chowdhri, president: 1. brief facts relating to this appeal are that the respondent got himself registered under the new pattern registration scheme of 1979 and deposited rs. 250/- as registration fee. on 17.3.93 the respondent requested for cancellation of the registration and refund of the said registration fee alongwith interest @ 7% p.a. having failed to secure the refund he approached the district forum. the d.f. gave reasonable opportunity to the opposite party to file its reply in order to explain the reasons why the refund of the deposit had not been made. it was observed that the deposit of the registration fee was not disputed nor was it in dispute that the complainant had surrendered the allotment and the surrender was accepted by the opposite party. for inordinate delay in refunding the amount of rs. 250/- the d.f. held the opposite party to be grossly deficient in service and accordingly directed refund of rs. 250/- alongwith interest @ 15% p.a. from the date of deposit till date of payment besides compensation of rs. 1,000/- on account of harassment and costs. aggrieved by the order the opposite party has preferred this appeal. 2. the learned counsel for the appellant submitted that infact rs. 560/- had been sent by cheque dated 14.7.95 though this fact could not be brought to the notice of the district forum on the date fixed owing to some communication gap. the fact that a cheque is stated to have been sent as alleged does not detract from the deficiency in service. we find no merit in the appeal. it is dismissed. the appellant shall, however, be entitled to adjust the amount already sent subject to encashment of the cheque in the amount to be paid in terms of the order of the district forum. the appeal is disposed of in these terms in limine. a copy of this order be sent to both the parties as well as d.f.-ii. appeal dismissed in limine.

Full Judgment

A.P. Chowdhri, President:

1. Brief facts relating to this appeal are that the respondent got himself registered under the New Pattern Registration Scheme of 1979 and deposited Rs. 250/- as registration fee. On 17.3.93 the respondent requested for cancellation of the registration and refund of the said registration fee alongwith interest @ 7% p.a. Having failed to secure the refund he approached the District Forum. The D.F. gave reasonable opportunity to the opposite party to file its reply in order to explain the reasons why the refund of the deposit had not been made. It was observed that the deposit of the registration fee was not disputed nor was it in dispute that the complainant had surrendered the allotment and the surrender was accepted by the opposite party. For inordinate delay in refunding the amount of Rs. 250/- the D.F. held the opposite party to be grossly deficient in service and accordingly directed refund of Rs. 250/- alongwith interest @ 15% p.a. from the date of deposit till date of payment besides compensation of Rs. 1,000/- on account of harassment and costs. Aggrieved by the order the opposite party has preferred this appeal.

2. The learned Counsel for the appellant submitted that infact Rs. 560/- had been sent by cheque dated 14.7.95 though this fact could not be brought to the notice of the District Forum on the date fixed owing to some communication gap. The fact that a cheque is stated to have been sent as alleged does not detract from the deficiency in service. We find no merit in the appeal. It is dismissed. The appellant shall, however, be entitled to adjust the amount already sent subject to encashment of the cheque in the amount to be paid in terms of the order of the District Forum. The appeal is disposed of in these terms in limine. A copy of this order be sent to both the parties as well as D.F.-II.

Appeal dismissed in limine.

Same Court & Year Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New ... Same Parties Delhi Development Authority vs D.C. GuptA. Same Subject Land Acquisition Same Judge A.P. Chowdhri, President; the Honourable Ms. Justice S. Brar ...

Land Acquisition