Haryana

Sonipat

130/2014

SUNIL DAHIYA S/O BALJIT SINGH - Complainant(s)

Versus

1. Parsvnath Developers Ltd.,2. The branch manager parsvnath develipers Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

PANKAJ TYAGI

09 Jan 2015

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,

SONEPAT.

               

                                Complaint No.130 of 2014

                                Instituted on:16.05.2014

                                Date of order:07.05.2015

 

Sunil Dahiya son of Baljit Singh, resident of H.No.2/350, Arya Nagar, Sonepat.

                                           ...Complainant

                           Versus

1.M/s  Parsvnath Developers Ltd. G-2(Ground Floor) Arunachal, 19, Bara Khamba road, Delhi through its Chairman/Managing Director.

2.Branch Manager, M/s Parsvnath Developers Ltd., near Devi Lal Park, GT road, Sonepat.                                                                                       ...Respondents

 

COMPLAINT UNDER THE ONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,1986

 

Argued by: Shri Pankaj Tyagi, Adv. for complainant.

           Shri Pankaj Rohila, Adv. for respondents.

BEFORE-    NAGENDER SINGH………………………………………………PRESIDENT.

          SMT.PRABHA WATI……………………………………………MEMBER.

          D.V.RATHI……………………………………………………………MEMBER.

O R D E R

            The complainant has filed the present complaint against the respondents alleging therein that one residential plot measuring 300 sq.yards was transferred in the name of the complainant on 28.5.2012.  Prior to this, one Naresh Kumar Dahiya has paid in advance an amount of Rs.25000/- on 21.6.2004. The said booking amount was transferred in the name of Mahabir Parshad Gupta, who later-on paid Rs.3,48,750/- to the respondents on 22.12.2005.  Later-on the said booking was transferred in the name of the complainant and on further demand, the complainant paid an amount of Rs.498750/- to Mahabir Parshad Gupta and the respondents issued a letter no.PDL/COMM/Sonepat/SO619 dated 28.5.2012 vide which the transfer of the booking was made and the amount so paid by the complainant was recorded in the records of the complainant.  It is further submitted that now a period of more-than nine years has been passed, but the respondents have neither issued any possession letter of the particular plot. The complainant personally approached the respondents and requested to allot the particular plot  and further to pay interest at the rate of 10% per annum on the deposited amount of Rs.4,98,750/- , but of no use and this wrongful act of the respondents have caused unnecessary mental agony and harassment to the complainant. So, he has come to this Forum and has filed the present complaint.

2.        In reply, the respondents have submitted that the transfer rights in favour of the complainant was confirmed vide respondent’s letter dated 28.5.2012.  The present complaint is time barred. The complainant in the undertaking has affirmed and agreed that in case the respondents are not able to provide any plot to the complainant, then he shall only be entitled to refund of payment made in this regard alongwith simple interest at the rate of 09% per annum.   The delay in the project was caused due to reasons beyond the control of the respondents and the delay could not be attributed to the respondents as per terms and conditions agreed upon by the respondents and the complainant.  The complainant has not suffered any mental agony or harassment at the hands of the respondents and thus, he is not entitled for any kind of relief and compensation and thus, prayed for the dismissal of the present complaint.

3.        We have heard the arguments advanced by both the learned counsel for the parties at length and have also gone through the entire relevant record available on the case file very carefully.

          Ld. Counsel for the complainant has submitted that one residential plot measuring 300 sq.yards was transferred in the name of the complainant on 28.5.2012 .  Now a period of more-than nine years has been passed, but the respondents have neither issued any possession letter of the particular plot. The complainant personally approached the respondents and requested to allot the particular plot  and further to pay interest at the rate of 10% per annum on the deposited amount of Rs.4,98,750/- , but of no use and this wrongful act of the respondents have caused unnecessary mental agony and harassment to the complainant.

          On the other hand, ld. Counsel for the respondents have also submitted that the transfer rights in favour of the complainant was confirmed vide respondent’s letter dated 28.5.2012.  The present complaint is time barred. The complainant in the undertaking has affirmed and agreed that in case the respondents are not able to provide any plot to the complainant, then he shall only be entitled to refund of payment made in this regard alongwith simple interest at the rate of 09% per annum.   The delay in the project was caused due to reasons beyond the control of the respondents and the delay could not be attributed to the respondents as per terms and conditions agreed upon by the respondents and the complainant.  The complainant has not suffered any mental agony or harassment at the hands of the respondents and thus, he is not entitled for any kind of relief and compensation.

          The respondents have also placed on record Annexure R8 i.e. case law titled as Ganesh Lal Vs.Shyam. 

          But the perusal of the contents of this case law reveals that the facts of the present case and the cited law are totally different.  In the present case, there is a dispute regarding the deficiency in service in between the complainant and the builders and no issue regarding demarcation, ownership and possession is involved in the case in hand.  Whereas in the cited case, there is a dispute between two private parties and not between any individual and builders.  So, the respondents cannot take the benefit of the cited law.

          We have gone through the entire relevant material available on the case file very carefully and it appears that the respondents have failed to allot any plot to the complainant despite the fact that they have received the huge amount of Rs.4,98,750/- from the complainant.  The respondents have also failed to issue any letter regarding allotment of the plot to the complainant.  Since the year 2005, so many projects have been launched by the respondents, but the respondents never made any effort to allot any plot to the complainant and that amounts to a grave deficiency in service on the part of the respondents.  Thus, we hereby direct the respondents to refund the deposited amount of Rs.4,98,750/- to the complainant alongwith interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of its deposit till realization.  The respondents are further directed to compensate the complainant to the tune of Rs.50,000/- (Rs.fifty thousand) for rendering deficient services, for causing unnecessary mental agony and harassment.

          With these observations, findings and directions, the present complaint stands allowed.

          Certified copy of this order be provided to both the parties free of cost.

File be consigned to the record-room.

 

(Prabha Wati)        (DV Rathi)                 (Nagender Singh-President)

Member DCDRF        Member DCDRF                   DCDRF, Sonepat.

Announced:07.05.2015