Haryana

StateCommission

CC/35/2018

KAMAL KUMAR GUPTA - Complainant(s)

Versus

ANSAL PROPERTIES AND INFRASTRUCTURE LTD. - Opp.Party(s)

R.C.GUPTA

28 Apr 2023

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

HARYANA PANCHKULA            

 Date of Institution:23.01.2018

                Date of final hearing:28.04.2023

                                                 Date of pronouncement:28.04.2023

 

Consumer Complaint No.35 of 2018

 

IN THE MATTER OF

 

Kamal Kumar Gupat son of Shri Dalip Chand Gupta, R/o House No.5, Sector 18 Ram Bagh, Near Randhir Cinema, Karnal presently resident of House No.60, Sector 8, Urban Estate, Karnal (Haryana).

                                                                                      .….Complainant

Through Mr. Sudhir Gupta, Advocate

 

Versus

 

 

1.      Ansal Properties and Infrastructure Limited having its registered office at 115, Ansal Bhawan, 16, KG Marg, New Delhi-110001 through its Chairman Mr. Sushil Ansal.

2.      Ansal Properties and Infrastructure Limited, Ansal Sales Office, Ansal Sushant City, Sector 12, HUDA, Near Village Kheri Rangran, Tehsil Jagadhari, District Yamuna Nagar through its Manager.

….Opposite parties

 

CORAM:   Hon’ble Mr. Justice T.P.S. Mann, President.

                   Mrs. Manjula, Member.

 

Present:-    Mr. Sudhir Gupta, advocate for the complainant.

None for the Ops.

 

O R D E R

Per Manjula, Member:

 

                    Brief facts giving rise for the disposal of the present complaint are that the complainant had applied for a residential plot with the OPs. The Ops allotted a plot bearing No.0037-B-1557 having approximate area measuring 420 sq. mtrs. to the complainant against a total sale consideration of Rs.26,87,412/-. It is submitted that the complainant and Ops entered into Plot Buyer Agreement on 27.04.2011 at Yamuna Nagar. It is further submitted that the complainant had paid a total sum of Rs.38,62,568/- to Ops till September 2017 but the Ops did not bother to develop the plot in question. The complainant made several requests to the Ops to deliver the possession of the plot but the Ops did not consider his genuine request. The complainant also sent a legal notice dated 05.12.2017 to Ops regarding refund of Rs.38,62,568.80p but of no use. Thus, there was deficiency in service on the part of the Ops. The complainant prayed that the Ops be directed to refund Rs.38,62,568.80p which was deposited by him alongwith interest @ 18% p.a. from the date of deposits; to pay Rs.5,00,000/- as compensation for mental agony and harassment; to pay Rs.2,00,000/- as punitive damages due to no delivery of the plot and Rs.33,000/- as litigation expenses, and other reliefs as prayed for.

2.                Notice of the complaint was issued against the Ops upon which the Ops appeared and filed their written version raising preliminary objections that complainant has no cause of action to file the present complaint; no jurisdiction; complaint is not maintainable etc. On merits, it is admitted that on application moved by complainant, plot No.0037-B-1557 was allotted to him by the OPs. It is also admitted that Plot Buyers Agreement execute between the parties on 27.04.2011. It is admitted that the complainant has paid a total sum of Rs.38,62,568.80p to the OPs. It is denied that the complainant was punctual in making the timely payment of installments. It is also denied that the complainant approached the Ops on many occasions and requested them to complete the construction. Further it is submitted that the development work was adversely affected due to an interim injunction order dated 16.04.2012 passed by the court of A.D.J. Yamuna Nagar. It is also submitted that the Ops will offer the possession of the plot to the complainant after completion of development work. Hence, there was no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

3.                When the complaint was posted for recording evidence of the complainant, the counsel for complainant has tendered into evidence affidavit of complainant as Ex.CW1/A vide which he has reiterated all the averments made in the complaint alongwith documents Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-8 and closed the same. On the other hand, learned counsel for the opposite parties has tendered into evidence affidavit of Sumit Kumar, Authorized Representative Ansal Properties Infrastructure Limited as Ex.OPW1/A and closed the same.

4.                The arguments have been advanced by Mr. Sudhir Gupta, learned counsel for the complainant. With his kind assistance entire record including documentary evidence as well as whatever the evidence had been led during the proceedings of the complaint has also been properly perused and examined.

5.                As per the basic averments made in the complaint including the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the complainant, the foremost question which requires adjudication by this Commission is as to whether the present complainant is entitled to get refund of the amount which he had already paid to the Ops, alongwith interest or not? 

6.                In view of the above submission and after careful perusal of the entire record, there  is no dispute  that the plot bearing No.0037-B-1557 was allotted to him. It is also admitted that plot buyers agreement was executed between the parties on 27.04.2011 (Ex.C-1). It is also not disputed that the basic cost of the plot was Rs.26,87,412/-. It is also evident that the complainant sent a legal notice to the Ops regarding refund of amount of Rs.38,62,568.80p (Ex.C-4). It is admitted and also evident that the complainant has paid a total sum of Rs.38,62,568.80p to the Ops as per the Customer Ledger (Ex.C-3) but no offer of possession has been made till date to the complainant. As such, there is a clear breach of terms and conditions of the Plot Buyers Agreement on behalf of the opposite parties.  When the project is not complete as such, this Commission is of the considered opinion that there is deficiency in service of opposite parties and thus, the complainant is well within his legal rights to get the refund of the amount of Rs.38,62,568.80p which he had already deposited with the opposite parties. Even otherwise also, there is a strong element of mental agony caused to the complainant for investing a huge amount of his hard earned money but still remained deprived of the possession of the plot. Under these circumstances, he had to knock the door of this Commission even for seeking refund of the amount. 

7.                In the light of the above observation and discussion, there are sufficient grounds to accept the complaint and while accepting the complaint, the Ops are directed to refund the amount of Rs.38,62,568.80p (Thirty eight lakhs sixty two thousand five hundred sixty eight and eighty paise only) along with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of respective deposits till its realization. In case, there is a breach or delay in making payment within the stipulated period of 45 days;  in that eventuality, the complainant would further be entitled to get the interest @ 15% per annum, for the defaulting period. The complainant is also entitled to Rs.2,00,000/- (Two Lakhs only) as compensation for mental agony and physical harassment.  In addition, the complainant is also entitled to Rs.30,000/- (Thirty thousand only) as litigation expenses.  It is also made clear that for non-compliance, the provisions enshrined under section 72 of the C.P. Act would also be attracted. 

8.                A copy of this order be provided to all the parties free of cost as mandated by the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. This order be uploaded forthwith on the website of the Commission for the perusal of the parties.

9.                Application(s), pending, if any, stands disposed off in terms of the aforesaid order.

10.              File be consigned to record room alongwith a copy of this order.

Pronounced on:28^th April, 2023

                                                                            

                                                                                               

                                                                                      T.P.S. Mann

                                                                                      (President)        

 

 

 Manjula

(Member) 

 

                                                                                                           

                                                                                                           

M.S.