DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BARNALA, CAMP COURT, AT AMRITSAR, PUNJAB.

Complaint Case No : RBT/CC/2018/5.

Date of Institution   : 01.01.2018/29.11.2021.

Date of Decision    : 22.06.2022.

Sh. Maninderjit Singh S/o Sh. Sajjan Singh aged 29 years resident of House No. 1056-B, New Partap Nagar, Amritsar. 

Sh. Navdeep Singh S/o Sh. Sajjan Singh aged 31 years resident of House No. 1056-B, New Partap Nagar, Amritsar.    

                …Complainants Versus

Amritsar Improvement Trust, through its Chairman/Authorized Person Ranjit Avenue, Amritsar, Punjab. 

                    …Opposite Party

 

Complaint Under Section 12 & 13 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986. As Amended Upto Date.

 

Present: Sh. Raj Kumar Gupta Adv counsel for complainant.

Sh. Arvind Kumar Adv counsel for opposite party. 

Quorum:-

1. Sh. Ashish Kumar Grover : President

2.Smt. Urmila Kumari : Member

 

(ORDER BY ASHISH KUMAR GROVER, PRESIDENT):

1. The present complaint has been received by transfer from District Consumer Commission, Amritsar in compliance of the order dated 26.11.2021 of the Hon'ble State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Punjab, Chandigarh. The complainants have filed the present complaint Under Section 12 & 13 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (as amended upto date) against the Amritsar Improvement Trust (hereinafter referred as opposite party)

2. Brief facts of the case are that the complainants had purchased one plot bearing number 9 situated at 97 Acre Scheme Ajnala Road, Amritsar and in this respect the complainants had paid a sum of Rs. 9,21,308/- to the opposite party. It is further alleged that the land of various plots have been acquired by the Airport Authority and the opposite party could not deliver the possession of the said plot to the complainants. The complainants had already paid a sum of Rs. 9,21,308/- for the above said plot and the opposite party was required to pay back the said amount to the complainants alongwith interest. The present rate of interest prevailing in the market is 18% per annum. It is further alleged that the opposite party issued a cheque bearing No. 689528 dated 1.7.2016 for Rs. 9,21,308/- to pay back the amount to the complainants. Thereafter, the opposite party paid interest @ 4% to the tune of Rs. 1,10,558/- (i.e. Rs. 55,279/- each) vide two cheques dated 11.11.2016, which shows that the opposite party has given only 4% interest over the amount deposited by the complainants, whenever the prevailing rate of interest in the market is 18 % per annum. It is alleged that when some dues are to be recovered by the opposite party from its customers they have also recovered the said amount alongwith interest @ 17% per annum. Therefore, the complainants are entitled to recover the amount alongwith interest @ 17% per annum. As such, the complainants are entitled to recover the different of 13% interest per annum on the aforesaid amount which comes to Rs. 3,59,305/-. The complainants have many times approached the opposite party and requested them to pay the aforesaid amount of interest, but the opposite party put off the matter on one pretext or the other, which clearly shows the deficiency in service on the part of opposite party. Hence, the present complaint is filed for seeking the following reliefs.- 

i) To pay the amount of Rs. 3,59,305/- as remaining balance interest on the amount deposited by the complainants alongwith interest @ 18% per annum from 1.7.2016 till date of payment. 

ii) To pay Rs. 50,000/-  as compensation and Rs. 15,000/- as litigation expenses.   

3. Upon notice of this complaint, the opposite party appeared and filed written statement by taking preliminary objections interalia on the grounds that the present complaint is not maintainable and Hon’ble Forum (now Commission) has no jurisdiction to try and entertain the present complaint. Further, the complainants have already received the amount from opposite party with their consent being fully satisfied now they have no right to file the present complaint. On merits the opposite party has denied the case of the complainants. 

4. In support of their case the complainants tendered into evidence affidavit of Maninderjit Singh as Ex.C1, copy of the letter dated 23.10.2015 Ex.C2, copy of the letter dated 6.1.2015 Ex.C3 and closed the evidence.  

5. On the other hand, to rebut the case of the complainants the opposite party tendered into evidence affidavit of Sh. Jeewan Bansal E.O. Ex.O.P1, copy of contingent bill Ex.O.P2, copy of the affidavit of Navdeep Singh Ex.O.P3, copy of the letter Ex.O.P3/A, copy of the letter dated 25.5.2016 Ex.O.P4, copy of the letter dated 29.4.2016 Ex.O.P5, copy of the resolution Ex.O.P6, copy of the letter dated 6.1.2016 Ex.O.P7, copy of the letter dated 7.10.2013 Ex.O.P8, copy of the account sheet Ex.O.P9, copy of the bid sheet Ex.O.P10, copy of the bid sheet Ex.O.P11, copy of the advertisement Ex.O.P12 and closed the evidence.   

6. We have heard the Ld. Counsel for the parties and have gone through the documents placed on record by the parties.  

7. Ld. Counsel for complainants argued that the complainants had purchased one plot bearing number 9 situated at 97 Acre Scheme Ajnala Road, Amritsar and paid a sum of Rs. 9,21,308/- to the opposite party. It is further argued that the above said land have been acquired by the Airport Authority but the opposite party could not deliver the possession of the said plot to the complainants and now the opposite party was required to pay back the said amount to the complainants alongwith interest @ 18% per annum. It is further argued by the Ld. Counsel for complainants that the opposite party issued a cheque bearing No. 689528 dated 1.7.2016 for Rs. 9,21,308/- to pay back the amount to the complainants and paid interest @ 4% which comes to the tune of Rs. 1,10,558/- (i.e. Rs. 55,279/- each) vide two cheques dated 11.11.2016. Ld. Counsel for the complainants also argued that the complainants are entitled to recover the different of 13% interest per annum on the aforesaid amount i.e. Rs. 3,59,305/-. Ld. Counsel for opposite party argued that the complainants have already received the amount from opposite party with their consent being fully satisfied and now they have no right to file the present complaint. It is not disputed between the parties that the amount which was deposited by the complainant with the opposite party for the purchase of above said plot bearing No. 9 situated at 97 Acre Scheme is refunded. In the present case the complainants have claimed the difference of 13% interest per annum i.e. Rs. 3,59,305/- on the amount which was refunded by the opposite party to the complainants. From the perusal of the file it is established that the complainants have failed to place on record any document to prove that the opposite party is bound to pay the interest @ 18% per annum on the deposit amount as alleged by the complainants in their complaint. The opposite party also placed on record copy of the affidavit of complainants Ex.O.P3 in which the complainants said that if the Improvement Trust, Amritsar refund the deposited amount to the complainants in that event they will not file any case in future before the Higher as well as Lower Court. 

8. In view of the above discussion, we do not find any merits in the present complaint, same is dismissed. However, there is no order as to cost. Copy of the order will be supplied to the parties free of costs by the District Consumer Commission, Amritsar as per rules. File be sent back to District Consumer Commission, Amritsar. 

ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COMMISSION:

       22nd Day of June, 2022

 

 

            (Ashish Kumar Grover)

            President             

 

(Urmila Kumari)

Member