BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-I, U.T. CHANDIGARH

========

Nipun Bagroy, # 184, R-Model Town, Hoshiarpur, Punjab.

…..Complainant

                 V E R S U S

ANSAL Properties & Infrastructure Ltd., through its Managing Director, Regional Office at SCO No. 183-184, Madhya Marg, Sector 9-C, Chandigarh.

                      ……Opposite Party

CORAM:   SH.P.D.GOEL                    PRESIDENT

         SH.RAJINDER SINGH GILL       MEMBER

         DR.(MRS).MADANJIT KAUR SAHOTA  MEMBER

Argued by: Sh. D.K. Singal, Counsel for Complainant.

          Sh. Amrinder Singh Sidhu, Proxy for

           Sh. Pavit Singh Mattewal, Counsel for OP.

PER DR.[MRS.] MADANJIT KAUR SAHOTA, MEMBER

         The complainant has filed the present complaint under Sec.12 of the Consumer Protection Act (as amended upto date) “hereinafter referred to as the Act”. The OP had invited applications for allotment of plots @ Rs.11,900/- per sq. yards in Ansal Golf Links, Sector 114, Mohali in the year 2007. Thereafter, the Complainant submitted an application for allotment of plot measuring 250 sq. yards in the said proposed residential colony on 11.10.2007 and deposited booking amount of Rs.5,95,000/-. On 12.10.2007, the OP had issued the allotment letter, allotting Plot No. 244, Sector 114, Golf Links-1, Mohali, in the aforesaid proposed residential colony to the Complainant. As per Cl.19 of the said allotment letter, the allottee would be entitled to take over the physical possession of the allotted plot only after the entire amount payable by him. The said allotment letter also contained development linked installment plan, duly reproduced in Para No.3 of the complaint. It was averred that the Complainant deposited 95% of the total consideration and 5% of the amount was also deposited against the above said allotted plot by the end of March, 2010, on intimating the offer of possession of the allotted plot and also deposited extra development charges, as envisaged in the said allotment and schedule annexed thereto. The details of the cheques/ demand drafts, which were deposited by the Complainant with the OP from time to time has been mentioned in Para 4 of the Complainant. Thereafter, the Complainant received letter dated 16.01.2010 from the OP, thereby offering only paper possession, as when the site was visited by the Complainant, to his utter surprise, the development works on the allotted site had not reached to the particular stage, which was laid down in the development linked installment plan. Moreover, the requisite approval from the concerned authorities had not been accorded facilitating offering of physical possession to the allottees. Further, the OPs vide statement dated 28.04.2010 demanded Rs.37,520/- from the Complainant on account of delayed payment interest; whereas, the Complainant had already deposited the amount in excess of the entitlement of the OP as per development linked installment plan. The Complainant met the officials of the OP, however, no plausible justification had been given. Faced with this situation, the Complainant got issued a legal notice dated 19.7.2010, but to no avail. Hence, this complaint.

2.         Notice of the complaint was sent to OP seeking its version of the case.

3.         The OP in its written statement, while admitting the factual matrix of the case, pleaded that there has been no delay. The FCN-cum-officer of Possession was issued in the month of January, 2010 and in accordance with it, the Complainant cleared final payment in the month of March, 2010. It was admitted that full and final payment towards basic and extra development charges was received from the Complainant. The payment of remaining 5% was deposited as per the wish of the Complainant, as the same was never demanded by the replying OP. It was submitted that relevant advertisement was published and the infrastructure development works had been completed for possession and a letter dated 16.01.2010 was sent to the prospective owners of the plots. It was denied that the development works on the allotted site had not been completed and there was a shift in development linked installment plan i.e. the Complainant was charged the 5^th and 6^th installment before the completion of the relevant development works. As per the stage linked installment plan, the correct stage was already reached and then the installment was called for vide letter dated 16.01.2010, which was finally paid by the Complainant after a delay of more than 2 months i.e. 20.3.2010. Accordingly, a statement dated 28.4.2010 was issued to the Complainant demanding Rs.37,520/- as interest on delayed payment. It was asserted that as a special case, an amount of Rs.12,000/- (as against interest charges for delayed payment of Rs.37,520/-) has been settled in favour of the Complainant and the balance amount of Rs.25,520/- has been waived off, keeping the interest of the Complainant in mind.

         It was submitted that all development works in the said plots were to be completed by March 2010 and it was only after the entire amount payable by the customers was paid that they would be entitled to take over the physical possession of their allotted plots. All development works and approvals facilitating construction and habitation have been granted by the competent authority. The Complainant has not come forward to take possession of the plot, as the replying OP was/is open and willing to register the plot in his name immediately. The delay, which crept in, was bonafide and not on account of whims and fancies of the replying OP. The delay was on the part of State Government, which did not accord facilities at the right time. All other material contentions of the complaint were controverted. Pleading that there was no deficiency in service on their part, a prayer has been made for dismissal of the complaint.

4.         Parties led evidence in support of their contentions.

5.         We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have also perused the record.

6.         The grouse of the Complainant in the present complaint is that even after lapse of a period of more than three years and deposit of entire sale consideration as per the development linked installment plan (Schedule-I), along with extra development charges qua Annexure C-2 to C-16, as per Clause 7, 13 & 19 respectively, of the allotment letter dated 12.10.2007, neither the development work have been completed by the OP, nor approval thereof facilitating construction and habitation thereon have been granted by the competent authority. Thereafter, an advertisement dated 14.01.2001 qua Annexure A-17 was published by the OP, in which, it was mentioned that celebrate the occasion of owning your plot at Golf Links, Mohali with possession letter. Thus, the offer of physical possession made to the Complainant by the OP, vide letter dated 16.01.2010 (C-18), was just hollow and false. Furthermore, when the Complainant visited the site, he was surprised to see that the development work on the allotted site had not reached to the particular stage as laid down in the development linked installment plan, as envisaged in Stage 5^TH and 6^TH of the development linked installment plan.    

7.              On the other hand, the OP had admitted that the Complainant had cleared the final payment in the month of March, 2010, as envisaged in the agreement, but denied the allegation that the development work has not been completed, till the advertisement made by the OP, as well as issuance of letter of possession to the prospective owners of the plot. The OP categorically made it clear that the interest on delay payment was waived off, as a special case, keeping in view the interest of the Complainant in mind. The said fact is apparent from a perusal of Annexure C-19, placed on record by the Complainant himself. It was asserted that all development works and requisite approvals facilitating construction and habitation thereof has been granted by the competent authority. It is the Complainant, who has not come forward to take the possession of the plot and the OP was/is ready and willing to register the plot in his name immediately. The delay, if any, was on the part of the State Government and not on the part of the OP.

8.         Having perused the entire documents placed on record by the parties, it has been made out that admittedly, the Complainant has fulfilled all the requisite eligibility conditions to get the possession of the said allotted plot e.g. making entire payment as per agreement. It is the allegation of the Complainant that neither the development works on the allotted site had reached to the particular stage, nor the requisite approvals took by the OP from the competent authority even after a period of more than 3 years has elapsed. The OP has raised the defence on the contrary that everything has been done. But to prove the said plea, no evidence has been produced on record.  

9.         As stated above, the OP has not produced any cogent evidence to support its assertions that the development work has been done and the basic facilities like electricity polls, water and sewerage facility has been provided to the allottees. Moreover, even during arguments, learned counsel for the OP has remained unanswered to prove in his favour, when asked to prove and provide any evidence that the development work has been done, as promised.   

10.       In view of the foregoings, we are of the considered opinion that the OP has miserably failed to produce any strict proof, from which it could be made out that the required development work has been completed, prior to the offer of the physical possession to the allottees. Mere verbatism has supported the cause of the Complainant, by which he has succeeded in proving that on account of delayed possession, the OP is liable to pay damages/ interest compensation for the non completion of development work, as well as non-grant of approval etc., as no plausible justification has been made out by the OP in their favour. 

11.       Now, it is proved beyond doubt that the very purpose of booking of the plot and allotment thereof stood defeated as the OP was lagging much behind schedule for carrying out the development works and all approvals thereof. The Complainant, had duly paid the total consideration of the plot, but got nothing in return. Resultantly, we feel that the ends of justice would be met if the Complainant would be granted compensation by way of interest on the amount deposited by him with the OP.

12.       In view of the above discussion, the complaint is allowed and the OP is directed to pay interest @12% p.a. on the total amount deposited by the Complainant with the OP from their respective date of deposit, till the date of handing over the actual physical possession of the allotted Plot in question to the Complainant, after completion of the entire development works, including amenities, at the site, in toto. The OP is also directed to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs.15,000/- as costs of litigation. 

13.       Certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge. The file be consigned.