Delhi

New Delhi

CC/1077/2013

Meenu Singhal - Complainant(s)

Versus

Alliance Nirman - Opp.Party(s)

01 Jun 2016

ORDER

 

 

CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-VI (DISTT. NEW DELHI), ‘M’ BLOCK, 1^STFLOOR,

VIKAS BHAWAN, I.P.ESTATE,

NEW DELHI-110002.

 

Case No.CC/1077/13                                                                                                           Dated:

 

In the matter of:

Mrs.MEENU SINGHLA,

C-301, SAI BABA APPARTMENT, ROHINI,

SECTOR-10

NEW DELHI-110075.

                 

         ……..COMPLAINANT

 

VERSUS

 

M/S.ALLIANCE NIRMAAN LTD. AND ANR.

THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR

324-325, 3^RD FLOOR, VERDHAMAN BAHNHO OF PLAZA, POCKET-7, PLOT NO.10 SECTOR-12,

DWARKA,

NEW DELHI-75

 

………. OPPOSITE PARTY

 

ORDER

 

PRESIDENT: S K SARVARIA

 

Complainant booked one plot measuring 200 Sq. Yds. in the proposed project of OP 4 named as “CITY ONE” at Rudrapur, Uttranchal, through OP No.2 vide Memo of Understanding executed between OP No.2 and Complainant dated 26.10.2006, vide which OP 2 transferred all its right, title and interest in the said plot of land against the mutually agreed consideration paid to him by the complainant.

It is further alleged by the Complainant that as per the rules of OP-1 she informed OP-1 and applied for transfer, which was duly accepted by OP -1.

It is alleged by the Complainant that on 20.1.2007 she paid a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- in cash against the receipt bearing No. CION RN-00751 dt.20.01.2007 to OP No-1, she again made a payment of Rs. Rs.1,00,000/- by way of cheque, against the receipt NO CION RN 02223 to  OP 1 as per the demand raised by OP 1.

It is further alleged by the Complainant that after making the payment of Rs.2,25,000/- by way of cheques, against the Receipt NO.CION RN 02289, her name was incorporated in the records of OP 1.

It is alleged by the Complainant that on 15.2.07 vide allotment of certificate dt.15.2.07 OP 1 allotted her plot No.B-269 situated at City One Rudrapur Uttranchal.

It is alleged by the Complainant that after negotiation she paid the final installment of Rs.2,25,000/- to OP-1 against which the receipt bearing No. NO.CION RN 0228 was issued by OP, with the assurance that soon the possession of the flat will be handed over to her.

It is alleged by the complainant that full payment of the plot was made to OP on 1.7.11, but the possession of the plot was not handed over to her, till the date of filing of complaint. 

It is further stated by the complaint that she received a DD for a sum of Rs.7,75,000/- from the OP against the criminal complaint filed by her in Economic Offence Wing (EOW), during the pendency of this complaint, and she accepted the same without prejudice to her right of  the interest over the amount deposited with OP, mental agony and legal expenses etc.  Hence this complaint.

Notice of the complaint was sent to the OP-1 through Regd. AD post for 20.2.14.   Since none appeared on behalf of OP it was ordered to be proceeded with ex-parte on 21.3.14.

 Complainant has filed her evidence by way of affidavit.  She has placed on record the copy of Memorandum of Understanding, copy of transfer application, copy of allotment certificate dt. 15.2.07, copies of the payment receipts issued by OP-1.  She has also placed on record the copy of Criminal Complaint filed before Economic Offence Wing, and the copy of protest letter dt. 5.6.14 in support of her claim.

We have heard arguments advanced at bar and have perused the record.

The Counsel of the complainant has stated that she had received a sum of Rs.7,75,000/- from OP 1 against the Criminal Complaint filed by her before Economic Offence Wing and she accepted the same without prejudice to her right as to the interest, compensation and litigation, which is proved by the copy of letter dt 3.6.14 written to OP 1.

We have gone through the case file and found that in her prayer clause, complainant had prayed to handover the possession of the plot in question.  Since the complainant had already received the amount of Rs.7,75,000/- deposited by her from OP during the pendency of this complaint, she is not entitled for the possession of the flat.

Therefore relief of handing over of plot in question has become infructuous, so cannot be granted.

Regarding the refund of the amount deposited by the complainant, the complaint stood partly satisfied. On account of refund of the principal amount with interest, we are of the opinion that as the calculation of interest from the dates of respective payment  made by the complainant to OP are neither specified nor any agreement between the parties are pleaded or shown to show 18% interest is agreed by the parties.

Therefore, it is in totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, including the period for which the principal amount is lying with the OP, we are of the considered opinion that award in lump sum for a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- to the complainant by the OP shall meet the ends of justice besides litigation cost.

We, therefore, partially allow the complainant and direct OP as under:-

1.Pay to the complainant a sum of Rs. 03 lacs for interest as well as for the pain and mental agony suffered by her.

2.Pay to the complainant a sum of Rs. 10,000/- towards the cost of litigation.

The order shall be complied with within 30 days of the receipt of the copy of the order. If the said amount is not paid by the OP within a period of one month from the date of receipt of this order, the same shall be recovered by the complainant along with simple interest at the rate of 10% per annum from the date of this order till recovery of the said amount of Rs. 10,000/–. This final order be sent to server (www.confonet.nic.in ). A copy each of this order each be sent to both parties free of cost by post.

File be consigned to the record room.

 

Pronounced in open Forum on 01.06.2016

 

 

(S K SARVARIA)

 PRESIDENT

 

 

 

(H M VYAS)

MEMBER