Complaint filed on: 20-02-2010<br /> Disposed on: 26-07-2010<br /> <br /> BEFORE THE BANGALORE IV ADDITIONAL DISTRICT <br /> CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,<br /> BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT, NO.8, SAHAKARA BHAVAN, CUNNINGHAM ROAD, BANGALORE – 560 052 <br /> <br /> C.C.No.362/2010<br /> DATED THIS THE 26th JULY 2010<br /> <br /> PRESENT<br /> <br /> SRI.D.KRISHNAPPA., PRESIDENT<br /> <br /> SRI.GANGANARASAIAH., MEMBER<br /> <br /> SMT. ANITA SHIVAKUMAR. K, MEMBER<br /> <br /> <br /> Complainant: - <br /> <br /> Mr.Arun S Bhandari,<br /> Aged about 30 years, <br /> S/o. Sathyanarayana.B.S,<br /> R/at No.307, 11-A Cross,<br /> 20th Main, JP Nagara, 2nd Phase,<br /> Bengaluru<br /> (Rep. by his GPA holder <br /> Mr.Praveen Anand) <br /> <br /> V/s<br /> <br /> Opposite party: - <br /> <br /> Army Housing Co-operative <br /> Society Ltd,<br /> No.179, 5th Main, 9th Cross,<br /> Indiranagara, 1st Stage, <br /> Bengaluru – 38<br /> (Rep. by its Secretary) <br /> <br /> O R D E R<br /> <br /> SRI. D.KRISHNAPPA., PRESIDENT., <br /> Grievance of the complainant against the opposite party [hereinafter called as OP for short) in brief is, that on the representation made by the OP promising to provide him a site near Suryanagara, Electronic City, Bengaluru, he applied for a site measuring 30 ft X 50 ft and paid Rs.3,01,335/- in two installments to the OP. OP has admitted receipt of on that amount. But the OP did not even form layout and no progress was also made. The OP made demand for subsequent payment without forming layout. The OP who had promised to provide a site did not make any progress but he is using his hard earned money. That he even went to verify the layout but land and layout was not shown to him. That he finding deficiency in the service of the OP got issued a legal notice on 8-2-2010 demanding repayment of his money. But the OP has not responded therefore has prayed for a direction to the OP to repay of Rs.1,01,355/- with interest at 18% per annum from 8-10-2007and also to award compensation of Rs.3,00,000/-.<br /> <br /> 2. OP has appeared through his advocate and filed version contending that, the complaint is not maintainable that the OP, body is superceded and an administrator is appointed. The OP has admitted receipt of the payment from the complainant as stated by him, who had applied for a site measuring 30ft X 40ft. It is further contended that they had entered into MOU with M/s.Nandi Builders for possessing land and to whom the money collected from the members was paid. When that the Nandi builders did not show any progress they demanded repayment of their money and that builders had issued a cheque which came to be bounced and have initiated legal proceedings against them. The OP has admitted to have neither acquired the land nor formed layout and by further contending that formation of layout is a long process needed approval of several authority and has stated on formation of layout they will allotment a site to the complainant and therefore has prayed for dismissal of the complaint. <br /> <br /> 3. In the course of enquiry into the complaint, the GPA holder of the complainant and in-charge secretary of the OP have filed their affidavit evidence reproducing what they have stated in their respective complaint and version. The complainant alongwith the complaint has produced copy of receipt for heaving paid first installment amount. Copy of sketch leading to the proposed layout with copy of the legal notice he got issued to the OP. The OP has produced a copy of the order of joint registrar of co-operative society for having superceded the elected body of the OP. We have heard the counsel for both the parties and perused the records. <br /> <br /> 4. On the above contentions following points for determination arise.<br /> 1. Whether the complainant proves that OP has caused deficiency in his service in not refunding his money?<br /> 2. To what reliefs, the complainant is entitled to?<br /> <br /> 5. Our findings are as under:<br /> 1. Answer Point No.1: In the affirmative <br /> 2. Answer Point No.2: To see the final order<br /> <br /> REASONS<br /> 6. Answer on Point No.1: The OP in his version and also in the affidavit evidence has contended that the complainant has made part payment towards allotment of a site, the OP though has not mentioned the total amount paid by the complainant but has not denied receipt of Rs.3,01,335/- from the complainant. The OP though has stated that the elected body of the OP is superceded and an administrator is appointed but has not denied the secretary in-charge is in charge of day to day affair of the society and it is that in-charge secretary is defending this complaint. Therefore we find no dispute between the parties with regard to those. <br /> <br /> 7. The OP admitting the payment has contending as if they had entered into MOU with Nandi developers for purchase of land and formation of layout but the developer did not do that and a cheque given by developers towards repayment of money to the OP is bounced and legal proceeding is initiated which we are not concerned here except to understand the fact that the OP has not made any progress in either acquisition of land and formation of layout. The OP in the version and also affidavit evidence has categorically made clear that they have neither acquired land nor formed layout, formation of layout is long process has to pass through various government machinery and legal hurdle etc. and thereby have indicated their inability to provide site to the complainant even in the near future. Therefore the complainant realizing the non performance of the OP even got issued a legal notice on 8-2-2010 demanding refund of money. But the OP has not responded. Hence under those circumstances, if the complainant opts to take back his hard earned money, it can not be found fault with as the complainant instead waiting can think of his own way for his betterment with his money. The OP has admitted that after receiving money well in advance has not made any progress to fulfill the promises made by them and that failure amounts deficiency, therefore we answer point no.1 in the affirmative and pass the following order: <br /> O R D E R<br /> Complaint is allowed. OP is directed to repay Rs.3,01,335/- to the complainant with interest at 18% per annum from 8-10-2007 until it is repaid and he shall repay that amount with interest within 60 days from the date of this order. <br /> <br /> OP shall also pay costs of Rs.3000/- to the complainant. <br /> <br /> Dictated to the Stenographer, got it transcribed and corrected, pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 26th July 2010.<br /> <br /> <br /> MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT <br /> <br /> <br />