Consumer Court battle between an employee and Karnataka Electricity Board(KEB) for a site – Refund 56k, Interest and Litigation cost

Introduction:
In a pivotal moment of personal vindication, the Bangalore Urban II Additional District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission delivered a landmark verdict on October 21, 2023, in the case CC/322/2022. Filed under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, the journey toward justice unravelled a tale of persistence, consumer rights, and the ultimate triumph of an individual against an entity.

Background:
Our protagonist, an earnest employee of the Karnataka Electricity Board and a longstanding member of the society in question, embarked on a quest for a residential haven – a 60 ft x 40 ft site in a layout at Yelahanka, Bengaluru. The dream, however, soured over time as promises turned into unfulfilled commitments, leading to a filing under Section 35.

Legal Odyssey:
The opposing party, resolute in their defence, contested the complaint, questioning its maintainability and the consumer status of our protagonist. The courtroom drama unfolded with the society citing legal entanglements and pending litigations as grounds for the delay in site allotments. Undeterred, our protagonist contended that the society, in the guise of allotment, had collected substantial sums without delivering the promised residential haven.

Courtroom Drama Unveiled:
As the gavel struck its final chord, the court meticulously examined the presented evidence and delivered profound findings:

1. The complainant successfully laid bare the deficiency of service on the part of the opposing party.
2. The court, recognizing the complainant’s entitlement to relief, ruled partly in the affirmative.

In-depth Analysis:
Delving into the court’s reasoning, it was emphasized that our protagonist had dutifully deposited Rs.64,000/- towards the site booking. This fact was irrefutably substantiated by cash receipts meticulously issued by the society. The court, unswayed by the society’s plea of pending litigations and layout formation delays, asserted that the complainant deserved a refund of Rs.56,000/-, along with interest at 10% per annum from the date of payment until realization. Additionally, the society was directed to disburse Rs.10,000/- as litigation costs to our protagonist.

Personal Victory Unveiled:
This consumer court triumph is more than just a legal resolution; it symbolizes an individual’s unwavering pursuit of justice. The court’s decision serves as a testament to the resilience of consumers in holding entities accountable for their commitments. Our protagonist can now anticipate the reimbursement, interest, and litigation costs rightfully awarded, bringing a profound sense of closure to a protracted legal saga.

Conclusion:
In the broader context, this case underscores the crucial role consumer protection laws play in upholding justice. As individuals, being cognizant of our rights and willing to pursue legal recourse when faced with injustices ensures a fair and just society. The Bangalore Urban II Additional District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission’s ruling sends a resounding message that entities must honour their commitments, or face legal consequences. The journey from grievance to resolution is a reminder that, as consumers, we have the power to reclaim justice and protect our rights.

For reading the complete judgement, click here