M.THANIKACHALAM, J. - (1.) THE opposite parties are the appellants.
(2.) THE complainant / respondent, coming to know the proposed construction of apartments, by the opposite parties, had booked a flat for Rs.11,56,322/-, by paying a token advance of RS.1 lakh, on 5.10.2008, and pursuant to the same, a provisional allotment of unit No.T18-B3-303, in third floor, in the upcoming Esplanade project was allotted. The opposite parties have assured, to refund the token advance, in case the housing loan does not materialized. The effort of the complainant to obtain housing loan failed, and therefore he sought the refund of the amount, which was denied by the opposite parties, as if as per the terms and conditions of the agreement, they are entitled to forfeit the amount, thereby caused deficiency, casing mental agony, compelling the complainant to come to the consumer forum, for the recovery of the said amount, alongwith compensation of Rs.1 lakh, in addition to a sum of Rs.50000/- for deficiency in service.
(3.) THE opposite parties, questioning the maintainability of the case, resisted the complaint, admitting the payment, contending that the sum paid was towards registration, which is liable to be forfeited, since the complainant failed to fulfill the conditions mentioned in the provisional allotment, and therefore the non-refund of the amount, cannot be termed as deficiency in service, praying for the dismissal of the complaint.;