MANAGING DIRECTOR, J&K COOP. HOUSING FEDERATION LIMITED Vs. TILAK RAJ GUPTA
LAWS(J&K)-1999-7-26
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
Decided on July 19,1999

MANAGING DIRECTOR, JANDK COOP. HOUSING FEDERATION LIMITED Appellant
VERSUS
TILAK RAJ GUPTA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Mr. T.S. Doabia, J. - (1.) AN order passed by the J&K State Consumer Protection Commission directing refund of an amount of Rs. 10,000/ - alongwith interest at the rate of 18% p.a. and also allowing compensation to the tune of Rs. 15,000/ - by way of loss and injury is subject matter of challenge in this appeal preferred by the J&K Co - operative Housing Federation Limited.
(2.) THE un -disputed facts are as under : On an assurance that the complainant/ respondent would be allotted a flat under Self - Financing Scheme parted with a sum of Rs. 10,000/ - each. THE flats were to be built in the area known as Kunjwani Extension. It is not in dispute that the amount was received by the appellant. Later on the allotments could not be made. THE respondents/complainants filed complaints. THEse have been allowed in the manner indicated above. At the time of hearing of this appeal an argument was raised that the complaint was not maintainable in view of the provisions contained in Section 63 of the J&K Co -operative Societies Act. It is stated that the appellant is an Apex Co - operative Society. It was not to make the allotments. The allotments were to be made by Jammu Co -operative House Building Society. It is accordingly submitted that the cause of action if any was against the afore -mentioned Co - operative Society. The fact that the appellant Apex Co -operative Society has received the amount is not being disputed. What is urged is that this amount was passed on to the Jammu Co - operative House Building Society. After the parties were heard the learned Counsel for the appellant submitted that the question as to whether the provisions of Section 63 of the Co - operative Societies Act would bar the filing of the complaint before the Commission be not adjudicated upon in this appeal and the question as to whether the direction could be given to the appellant to refund the amount and that too with interest alongwith a direction to pay compensation is required to be considered. We have, therefore, confined ourselves to this aspect of the matter only.
(3.) IT is not in dispute that the amount was received by the appellant. If this be the situation then it is bound to return the same. The argument put across that the Apex Society has passed on the amount to Jammu Co -operative House Building Society is an argument which cannot be accepted. That is an arrangement between the Apex Society and the aforementioned Society. IT can seek the refund of the amount from the aforementioned Society. Therefore, the direction given by the State Commission in this regard cannot be faulted.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.