Delhi

East Delhi

CC/130/2017

S. SEXENA - Complainant(s)

Versus

AMRAPALI - Opp.Party(s)

09 Jul 2018

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM (EAST)

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

CONVENIENT SHOPPING CENTRE, FIRST FLOOR,

SAINI ENCLAVE, DELHI – 110 092

 

 

C.C. NO. 130/17

 

Mrs. Sumedha Saxena

W/o Shri Praveer Kumar Saxena

4A/3094, Vasundhara, Ghaziabad

UP – 201 012                                                           ….Complainant

 

Vs.    

 

1. M/s. Hi Tech City Developers Pvt. Ltd.

307, 3^rd Floor, Nipun Tower, Plot No. 15

Community Centre, Karkardooma, Delhi – 92

 

2. M/s. Amrapali Group

C-56/40, Sector-62, Noida, UP – 201 307

 

3. Shri Shiv Priya (Director OP- 1 & 2)

S/o Shri K.M. Sharma

C-56/40, Sector-62, Noida, UP – 201 307

 

4. Shri Sanjeev Ranjan

S/o Shri Shatrughan Prasad Sinha

C-56/40, Sector-62, Noida, UP – 201 307

 

5. Shri Sunny Thakur

C-56/40, Sector-62, Noida, UP – 201 307                       …Opponents

 

 

Date of Institution: 29.03.2017

Judgement Reserved on: 09.07.2018

Judgement Passed on: 10.07.2018

CORUM:

Sh. Sukhdev Singh (President)

Dr. P.N. Tiwari (Member)

Ms. Harpreet Kaur Charya (Member)

 

Order By: Sh. Sukhdev Singh (President)

 

JUDGEMENT

            This complaint has been filed by Mrs. Sumedha Saxena against M/s. Hi Tech City Developers Pvt. Ltd. (OP-1), M/s. Amrapali group (OP-2), Shri Shiv Priya, Director of OP-1 and OP-2 (OP-3),  Shri Sanjeev Ranjan (OP-4) and Shri Sunny Thakur (OP-5) under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 with allegations of unfair trade practice and deficiency in service. 

2.       The facts in brief are that the complainant purchased a flat from M/s. Amrapali Group (OP-2) in its project Amrapali Empire at NH-24, Village Dundahera, Ghaziabad.  The project was being constructed and managed by M/s. Hi Tech City Developers Pvt. Ltd. (OP-1). 

          It was stated that in the month of November, 2015,               M/s. Hi Tech City Developers Pvt. Ltd. (OP-1) took a sum of           Rs. 3,60,000/- towards sale deed of the property, which was received by Mr. Sunny Thakur (OP-5), representing OP-1.  The sale deed was executed and registered on 29.04.2016 between M/s. Hi Tech City Developers Pvt. Ltd. (OP-1) through its Director Shri Shiv Priya    (OP-3) and Mrs. Sumedha Saxena, complainant and all the documents were signed by Mr. Sanjeev Ranjan (OP-4), power of attorney holder of OP-3.

          It was further stated that OPs have fraudulently taken            Rs. 30,000/- in excess from the complainant as the total cost of the sale deed was Rs. 3,30,000/- and Rs. 27,000/- had already been charged by the OPs as clerical charges for the sale deed for which no receipt was issued. 

          The complainant sent several emails dated 19.07.2016, 21.07.2016, 23.08.2016, 29.08.2016 and 06.09.2016 seeking refund of the excess amount, but all in vain.  Hence, the complainant has prayed for refund of Rs. 30,000/- alongwith 18% interest;                Rs. 1,00,000/- as compensation on account of harassment and mental agony and Rs. 21,000/- towards cost of litigation.

3.       In the Written Statement filed on behalf of OP no. 1 to 3, they have stated that complainant paid an amount of Rs. 3,60,000/- to OP on account of purchase of stamp paper as well as miscellaneous expenses/legal costs to be incurred in getting the sale deed/transfer document prepared and to be registered with Registrar’s Office in the name of the complainant.  Other facts have also been denied.

4.       Rejoinder to the WS of OP no. 1 to 3 was filed by the complainant where the contents of the WS have been denied and has reaffirmed the averments of her complaint. 

5.       In support of its case, the complainant have examined herself.  She has deposed on affidavit.  She has narrated the facts which have been stated in the complaint.  She has got exhibited documents such as copy of receipt of money towards the cost of the flat (Ex.CW1/A), receipt of Rs. 3,60,000/- (Ex.CW1/B), copy of sale deed (Ex.CW1/C) and copy of emails sent to OP (Ex.CW1/D colly.). 

          In defence, OP have examined Shri Abhay Singh, legal Executive of M/s. Amrapali Group, who has also deposed on affidavit.  He has also narrated the facts which have been stated in the WS. 

6.       We have heard the complainant in person and have perused the material placed on record as none has appeared on behalf of OPs.  It has been argued on behalf of complainant that an extra amount of Rs. 30,000/- has been taken for getting the unit registered by M/s. Hi Tech City Developers Pvt. Ltd. (OP-1). 

          It is admitted case of both the parties that an amount of         Rs. 3,60,000/- was taken by M/s. Hi Tech City Developers Pvt. Ltd. (OP-1) for getting the sale deed executed.  The plea taken on behalf of complainant has been that the stamp paper which were to be purchased for getting the sale deed executed was for Rs. 3,30,000/-, though they have taken an excess amount of Rs. 30,000/-.  However, the plea taken on behalf of M/s. Amrapali Group (OP-2) in the WS as well as the testimony of Mr. Abhay Singh, Legal Executive, has been that an amount of Rs. 3,60,000/-  was taken on account of purchase of stamp paper as well as miscellaneous expenses/legal costs to be incurred in getting the sale deed/transfer document prepared and to be registered with Registrar.  However, it has been stated on behalf of complainant that they gave a separate amount of Rs. 27,000/- on account of clerical charges for the sale deed for which no receipt was issued by OPs. 

          Though, there is nothing on record to show that an extra amount of Rs. 27,000/- was given to OPs on account of miscellaneous charges, but the fact remains that an amount of       Rs. 3,60,000/- was given to OPs for getting the sale deed executed.  This amount has been reflected in the receipt, filed on record, the reading of which shows that an amount of Rs. 3,60,000/- was received on behalf of M/s. Hi Tech City Developers Pvt. Ltd. (OP-1) on account of sale deed.  Thus, from this document, it comes out that the complainant have paid an amount of Rs. 3,60,000/-, though the cost of stamp paper for execution of sale deed was Rs. 3,30,000/-.  When an extra amount of Rs. 30,000/- has been taken towards sale deed, certainly, it amounts to unfair trade practice as well as deficiency in service on the part of M/s. Hi Tech City Developers Pvt. Ltd. (OP-1) and M/s. Amrapali Group (OP-2).

          The fact that this excess amount of Rs. 30,000/- has not been paid back to the complainant inspite of several emails, the complainant have suffered mental pain and agony for which she has to be compensated.

          We, therefore, order that M/s. Hi Tech City Developers Pvt. Ltd. (OP-1) and M/s. Amrapali Group (OP-2) shall refund an amount of Rs. 30,000/- to the complainant.  They are further directed to pay an amount of Rs. 10,000/- towards compensation on account of mental pain and agony which includes the cost of litigation. 

          This order be complied within a period of 45 days, if not complied the total awarded amount of Rs. 40,000/- shall carry 9% interest from the date of order.

          Copy of the order be supplied to the parties as per rules.

          File be consigned to Record Room.

 

 

 

(DR. P.N. TIWARI)                                              (HARPREET KAUR CHARYA)

       Member                                                                             Member    

 

 

            (SUKHDEV SINGH)

                   President