Kerala

StateCommission

CC/13/41

MAHALING GANGAPPA SHIROL - Complainant(s)

Versus

APPLE A DAY PROPERTIES PVT LTD - Opp.Party(s)

SARIKA R V

25 Jun 2014

ORDER

KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

VAZHUTHACAUD THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

CC NO.41/13

JUDGMENT DATED: 24/06/2014

PRESENT

JUSTICE SHRI.P.Q. BARKATH ALI:                        PRESIDENT

SHRI.V.V. JOSE:                                                          MEMBER

 

Mahaling Gangappa Shirol,

52/A, Suvarna,

Ruturaj Housing Society,

Pune – 411037                                         -                  COMPLAINANT

 

(By Adv. Sri. Prabhu Vijayakumar)

 

V/s.

 

Apple A Day Properties Pvt. Ltd.,

Apple Tower, Palarivattom,

N.H. Bye Pass, Edappally,

Ernakulam.

R/by its Managing Director,

Saju Kadavilan                                         -                  RESPONDENT

 

JUDGMENT

SHRI.V.V. JOSE:         MEMBER

 

          This is a complaint filed under section 12 of  the Consumer Protection Act,1986.

2.      Complainant had booked two plots  in the New Cochin Project of the opposite party.  Complainant was induced to book the same due to the advertisements in print and visual media by the opposite party.  The complainant was made to believe that the opposite party with impeccuble repute of completing projects in time.  The complainant had also entered into an agreement with the opposite party for the said plots i.e. plots No.135 and 143.  The complainant had paid an amount of Rs.9,00,000/- to the opposite party towards the payment of the said plots.  It was assured by the opposite party to develop the plots and register it in the name of complainant after completing the compound wall with gate.  Opposite party failed to register the plots in the assured time.  The complainant sent a registered legal notice to the opposite party to handover the plots and also to pay a compensation of Rs.15,00,000/-.  Notice was accepted but no reply.  According to the complainant the act of the opposite party by receiving the whole amount and not registering the developed plots to the complainant, is deficieny of service and unfair trade practice, which entitle the complainant for compensation.  Hence this complaint for a direction to the opposite party to register and handover the agreed two plots or in alternative refund Rs,9,00,000/- to the complainant with 18% interest from the date of payment of 1^st instalment till realisation.  Further the opposite party should be directed to pay an amount of Rs.15,00,000/- as compensation with 12% future interest and for cost of proceedings.

                   

3.      After admitting the complaint, notice was sent to the opposite party.  The said notice was returned with an endorsement “unclaimed”.  So notice is deemed to have served to the opposite party.  Opposite party was called absent and set ex-parte.  Complainant filed proof affidavit and Ext.A1 to A3 was marked.

         

4.      Ext.A1 is an agreement of sale of plot No.135 with an extent of 6.17 cents in Thaikattussery Village, which is inclusive of 0.9255 cents being the undevided share and for developing the plot and construction of compound wall with gate to the said plot.

         

5.      Ext. A1(a) is an agreement of sale of plot No.143 with an extent of 6.17 cents in Thaikattussery village, which is inclusive of 0.9255 cents being the undevided share and for developing the plot and construction of compound wall with gate to the said plot.  Ext.A2 is the copy of legal notice sent to the opposite party by the complainant.  Ext.A3 is the AD card of the above legal notice.

         

6.      On a perusal of the documents listed above; it is evident that complainant has entered into an agreement with the opposite party for sale of two plots numbered No.135 and No.143 in New Cochin Project of the opposite party.  Ext.A1 and Ext. A1(a) clearly shows the agreement with an advance payment of Rs.4,50,000/-  each.  In page 10 of both agreements clause 5 clearly shows the acceptance of money by the opposite party.

         

7.      Non conveyance of the agreed plots after receiving money is a clear case of deficiency and unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite party, which entitle the complainant for refund of the amount paid with compensation and cost.  The affidavit in lieu of chief examination and documents prove the case of the complainant. 

         

8.      We do not have any hesitation to direct the opposite party to refund the amounts paid as advance for two plots with interest @ 12% from the date of agreement till the payment.

         

In the result, complainant is allowed directing the opposite party to refund Rs.9,00,000/- with 12% interest from 17/12/2008 i.e. the date of

agreement.   We are not awarding any compensation, as we have awarded 12% interest for the amount paid.  Complainant is entitled to Rs.5,000/- as cost of this proceedings.

 

V.V. JOSE:                                                MEMBER

 

 

 

 

JUSTICE P.Q. BARKATH ALI:       PRESIDENT

 

 

APPENDIX

Exhibit for the complainant:

1,  Ext. A1:         Agreement of sale of plot No.135

2,  Ext. A1(a):    Agreement for sale of plot No.143

3,  Ext.A2:          Copy of Legal Notice

4,  Ext.A3:          AD card of the Legal Notice

 

V.V. JOSE:                                                MEMBER

 

 

 

JUSTICE P.Q. BARKATH ALI:       PRESIDENT

 

 

nb