Andhra Pradesh

Visakhapatnam-II

CC/174/2014

G. Krishna Murthy - Complainant(s)

Versus

Akshya Gold Farms and Villas India Limited ( A Public Limited Company ) - Opp.Party(s)

Ch. Papa Rao

30 May 2015

ORDER

                  Reg. of the Complaint:11-06-2014

                                                                                                                                      Date of Order:30-05-2015

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMERS FORUM-II

AT VISAKHAPATNAM

                   Present:

1.Sri H.ANANDHA RAO, M.A., L.L.B.,

       President

2.Sri C.V.RAO, M.A., B.L.,

                                             Male Member

3.Smt.K.SAROJA, M.A., B.L.,

       Lady Member

                                            

 

SATURDAY, THE 30^TH DAY OF MAY, 2015

CONSUMER CASE NO.174/2014

 

BETWEEN:

Sri G.Krishna Murthy, S/o G.L.N.Acharya (late),

Hindu, aged 65 years, Retd., Professor in

Department school of Economics,

Andhra University, Visakhapatnam and presently

r/a flat No.306, Sita Residency, Ramnagar,

Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh.

…Complainant

AND:

Akshaya Gold Farms & Villas India Limited

(A Public Limited Company) Regd. No.056203,

Rep. by its Managing Director cum chairman,

Regd. & Admin Office situated at D.No.47-14-9/9,

3^rd floor, HDFC Bank Upstairs, Potluri Mansion,

Dwarakanagar main road, Visakhapatnam-16

…Opposite Party

This case coming on 25-05-2015 for final hearing before us in the presence of SRI CH.PAPA RAO, Advocate for the Complainant, and Opposite Party is being exparte, and having stood over till this date for consideration, this Forum made the following.

 

ORDER

 (As per the Honourable President on behalf of the Bench)                                                                              

1. The Complainant filed the present complaint against the Opposite Party, directing him to pay an amount of Rs.1,08,000/- with interest @ 24% p.a., from the date of payment i.e., 01-02-2013 till realization, compensation of Rs.1,00,000/-  and costs of Rs.10,000/-.
2. The case of the complainant in brief is that the Opposite Party which is in the filed of business of Real Estate collected amount from the complainant under a scheme of Own Your Land Scheme Scheme. In terms of the scheme, the complainant paid an amount of s.1,08,000/- towards full sale consideration to the OP at one installment on 01-02-2013 and allotted 8100sft units in S.No.138, Jamadhala Village,  at Parvathipuram Mandal, in Vizianagaram District and that he was allotted subscription code No. and office code as 170853/7777 and in this agreement, the OP mentioned the value of the property offered by company as Rs.1,17,000/-  but he paid the total sale consideration of Rs.1,08,000/- on 01-02-2003 as advance. Therefore, when he visited this layout, he found it is not developed as per the norms of the VUDA.
3. As the OP did not come forward when they demanded to show the LP, he was asked to wait and subsequently, he came to know that the Managing Director and Directors  and staff were arrested and promised to the public that they will settle and refund the amount to the subscribers but till today they have not do so. Hence, this complaint to refund his amount with interst and costs.
4. The complainant approached this forum alleging unfair trade practice and deficiency of service on the part of OP and also to refund the amount with interest and compensation and costs.
5. This forum after issuance of notice to the OP, they were returned unserved. Thereupon the counsel for the complainant with permission took substitute service and accordingly got the same published in Justice Today Newspaper of Visakhapatnam and filed proof of publication. Despite the said fact the OP has not chosen to put in his appearance.
6. To prove the case on behalf of the complainant, he filed his sworn affidavit and got marked Exhibit A1 and A3.
7. Exhibit A1 is the Agreement dated 01-02-2013, Exhibit A2 is the Form No.5 Credit Voucher issued by the Opposite Party in the name of the complainant and Exhibit A3 is the Order of the Honourable State Commission  dated 29-04-2014 in C.C.No.212/2013
8. Complainant filed his written arguments.
9. Heard oral arguments of the complainant.
10. Now the point for determination to be determined in this case is;

Whether there is any deficiency of service on the part of the Opposite Party and the Complainant is entitled to any reliefs asked for?

11. Having consider the submissions of the Learned Counsel for the Complainant so also the Chief Affidavit of the Complainant coupled with Exhibits A1 to A3, we are of the view that the OP has collected the amounts from the complainant with a promise to  refund the amount with interest and further agreed to give units but failed to either to allot any land or to pay the said amount to the complainant as promised which act amounts to deficiency in service and there was no protest by the OP despite the fact that notice was got published in Justice Today News Paper.
12. Therefore, we are of the considered view that complaint can be allowed. Added to it, Exhibit A1 clearly goes to show that an agreement was entered into between the complainant and the OP on 01-02-2013 and further vide Exhibit A2 Form No.5 was issued by the OP in the name of the complainant. Both these documents clearly and categorically goes to show that there was an agreement in between the parties and total subscription amount payable to the OP is Rs.1,08,000/- agreement expiry date is 02-03-2014. Though the complainant paid the amount in advance, the OP failed to allot the required units as agreed upon which indicates clear deficiency of service on the part of OP. Therefore, the complainant is entitled for the reliefs as sought for.
13. Now the question that comes up for consideration, at this stage of our discussion is, what is the rate of interest for which the Complainant is entitled.   The rate of interest claimed by the Complainant is 24% p.a.  This rate of interest claimed by the Complainant appears to be excessive, of course, it is a fact that the transaction covered by Ex.A1 is commercial in nature, but that does not and cannot mean to say that the Complainant is licensed to claim interest @ 24% p.a. from 01-02-2013.  But at the same time, it is imperative on our part to award a reasonable interest.   Having regard to all these facts and circumstances, we sincerely feel having considered the case on hand awarding of interest @ 9% p.a. would better serve the ends of justice.    Consequently, we proposed to fix the rate of interest @ 9% p.a. on Ex.A 1 i.e., Agreement expiry date in question.   Accordingly interest is ordered.
14. Whether the Complainant is entitled for compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- is to be considered.   It appears as seen from the evidence of Complainant that the Complainant has lot good faith on the Opposite Party in not developing the venture of the OP and therefore he experienced a lot of physical strain besides mental agony and financial loss. Naturally, that might have put the Complainant to suffer some mental agony besides physical stress and strain.   In this view of the matter, we sincerely feel that it is a fit case to award compensation.   But that does not and cannot mean to say that the Complainant claim for compensation is acceptable.    Having regard to all these facts and circumstances, we are of the considered opinion, award of compensation of 10,000/- would serve the ends of justice.   We therefore, proposed to award compensation of Rs.10,000 /-,  in the circumstances of the case on hand. Accordingly this point is answered.
15. Before parting our discussion, it is incumbent and imperative on our part to consider the costs of litigation.    The Complainants ought not have to approach this Forum had his claim for payment of Rs.1,08,000 /- or reliefs sought for have been honored by the Opposite Party within a reasonable time and in view of the matter, the    Complainant’s claim for costs deserves to be allowed.   In our considered and unanimous opinion awarding a sum of Rs.2,500/- as    costs would appropriate and reasonable.   Accordingly costs are          awarded.
16. In the light of our discussion, referred supra, the complainant is entitled to receive the sum of Rs.1,08,000/-  with interest for the said sum @ 9% with interest from 02-03-2014 i.e., Agreement Expiry date till the date of realization, a compensation of Rs.10,000/- and costs of Rs.2,500/-.
17. In the result, this compliant is allowed in part, directing the Opposite Party to refund Rs.1,08,000/- (Rupees One Lakh and eighty thousand only) with interest @ 9% from 02-03-2014 i.e., Agreement Expiry date till the date of realization, a compensation of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) and costs of Rs.2,500/-(Rupees Two Thousand and five hundred only) to the Complainant. Time for compliance, one month from the date of this Order. 

Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by him, corrected and pronounced by us in the open Forum, on this the 30^th day of May, 2015.                                    

 

Sd/-                                        Sd/-                                         Sd/-

LADY MEMBER                            MALE MEMBER                        PRESIDENT       

 

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

  For the Complainant:-

Exhibits	Date	Description	Remarks
A1	01-02-2013	Agreement	Original
A2	01-02-2013	Form No.5 Credit Voucher issued by the OP in the name of the Complainant.	Original
A3	29-04-2014	Order copy of the Hon’ble State Commission, Hyderabad.	Photocopy

 

For the Opposite Party:-      -nil-
 

Sd/-                                        Sd/-                                         Sd/-

LADY MEMBER                            MALE MEMBER                        PRESIDENT