K.P. MATHUR Vs. LAKSHMIPRIYA TOWNSHIP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appeal is filed by the complainant against the order dated 19.2.009 passed by the District Forum Ranga Reddy whereby the complaint was dismissed.

(2.) The facts of the case are that the complainant joined as a member in the scheme launched by the opposite parties and the name and style Shivapriya Nagar in Sy.No.207 and 208 of Abdullahpurmet and in Sy.No.192, 196, 202 to 213, 214 to 219 and 230 of Gandicheruvu Village, of Hayatnagar Mandal of R.R.District. The duration of the scheme was 36 months. A member has to pay an amount of Rs.500/- at the time of joining in the scheme and balance amount has to be paid in instalments @ Rs.500/- per month besides an amount of Rs.1000/- to be paid once in every six months in addition to the regular instalments. The total value of the each plot admeasuring 200 sq.yards is Rs.24,100/-. Bumper prizes are said to have been offered to the members who paid initial amount of Rs.2,400/-. The complainant paid an amount of Rs.25,100/- under membership No.14302 and Rs.2300/- towards registration charges. The opposite party has entered into an agreement dated 19.12.1993 and issued passbook in favour of the complainant. The opposite party issued a circular dated 8.6.1998 that the land was divided into plots and arrangement of the amenities was delayed due to unavoidable circumstances and that the registration work could be completed by the end of June 1998.

(3.) Press reports said to have dealt with a criminal complaint was filed against the opposite parties with the police, Saifabad. The opposite parties floated the scheme and collected the amount for the plots without acquiring the land. The opposite party no.2 fled from the spot subsequently to which he had given a press statement on 24.8.2001 that his company has purchased 1200 acres of land and he has registered 800 acres of land to the members. The opposite party stated to have floated similar schemes earlier without acquiring any land thereunder resulting filing of several cases against them in the consumer fora in Hyderabad, Rangareddy, Vijayawada, Kadapa, Ananthapur, Ongole, Karimnagar, Warangal and Guntur where the District Fora passed the order holding that the opposite party played unfair trade practice and they were directed to refund the amount. The opposite parties remained exparte. The complainant has filed his affidavit and the documents Exs.A1 to A8. The District Forum has dismissed the complaint for the reason that the complainant has not filed his affidavit in the form of evidence. The point for consideration is whether the complainant is entitled to the claim as prayed for?