Haryana

StateCommission

CC/243/2016

HARPREET SUKHRAMANI - Complainant(s)

Versus

ADEL LANDMARKS LTD. - Opp.Party(s)

INDERDEEP SINGH

26 Sep 2016

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION HARYANA, PANCHKULA

                                                 

 

Consumer Complaint No: 243 of 2016

                                                Date of Institution:           26.08.2016

                                                Date of Decision:             26.09.2016

 

 

 

Harpreet Sukhmani wife of Sh. Jai Kumar, resident of G-103, 1st Floor, Mansarover Garden, New Delhi – 110015.

                                      Complainant

 

Versus

 

Adel Landmarks Limited (formerly known as Era Landmarks Limited), Branch/site office, Sector 103, Cosmo City, Gurgaon, through its Director Sumit Bharana.

2nd Address:

B-24, Sector 3, Noida, Uttar Pradesh.

                                      Opposite Party

 

 

 

 

 

CORAM:             Hon’ble Mr. Justice Nawab Singh, President.

                             Shri B.M. Bedi, Judicial Member.

                             Mr. Diwan Singh Chauhan, Member.                       

 

         

Present:              Shri R.S. Randhawa Advocate, Advocate for complainant.

 

 

                                                   O R D E R

 

 

NAWAB SINGH J.(ORAL)

 

          The present complaint under Section 17 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short, ‘Consumer Act’) has been filed by Harpreet Sukhmani-complainant, averring that she booked a flat with Adel Landmarks Limited  (hereinafter referred to as ‘the builder’)-Opposite Party, in Sector-86, Gurgaon by depositing Rs.4,50,000/- on July 18th, 2011.  The Basic Sale Price of the flat was Rs.53,99,100/-. The builder allotted flat No.CSM/86/A-0701, to the complainant vide letter dated February 28th, 2013. A Buyer’s Agreement (Annexure C-4) was executed between the complainant and the builder on May 21st, 2014.  The possession of the flat was to be offered within 54 months from the date of execution of the buyers agreement with a grace period of six months or grant of all statutory approvals, whichever is later subject to delay or failure due to Force Majeure conditions and reasons mentioned in the agreement. The price of the flat was to be paid by the complainant as per Schedule of Payment.  The complainant paid the amount of Rs.17,96,536/- to the builder. The builder did not start construction. The complainant sought refund of the amount deposited by her but to no avail.  Hence, the instant complaint.

2.      Learned counsel for the complainant argued that though the amount deposited is less than Rs.20.00 lacs, which falls within the jurisdiction of District Consumer Forum, however since the complainant has also sought the interest, so by adding interest, the amount payable by the builder would work out to more than Rs.20.00 lacs and therefore this Commission has pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain and try the present complaint.

3.      The contention raised is not tenable. It is well settled principle of law that the interest cannot be added at initial stage to bring the case within the jurisdiction of State Commission or National Commission, as the case may be.  Support to this view can be had from the recent judgment in Consumer Case No.1369 of 2015, Ishita Bhatia and another versus M/s Unitech Limited and others, decided on March 07th, 2016, by the Hon’ble National Commission.

 

4.      In view of the above, the complaint is dismissed with liberty to file the same before the Appropriate District Forum.  It would be open to the complainant to file an application before the District Forum under Section 14 of the Limitation Act for excluding the period spent before this Commission for the purpose of computation of limitation in terms of the observations made by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Laxmi Engineering Works Vs. PSG Industrial Institute (1995)3 S.C.C. 583.

 

 

Announced

26.09.2016

Diwan Singh Chauhan

Member

B.M. Bedi

Judicial Member

Nawab Singh

President

UK

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.