Delhi

East Delhi

CC/420/2013

SUSHMA RANI - Complainant(s)

Versus

ARUN DEV BUILDER - Opp.Party(s)

24 Aug 2017

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM (EAST)

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

CONVENIENT SHOPPING CENTRE, FIRST FLOOR,

SAINI ENCLAVE, DELHI – 110 092

 

 

C.C. NO.  420/13

 

Mrs. Sushma Rani Negi

W/o Shri Guru Sharan Singh Negi

R/o 7530 RP No 2^nd , Gali No. 4

Amar Mohalla, Gandhi Nagar

Delhi – 110 031                                                                     ….Complainant

Vs.

1. Arun Dev Builders

F-1211, C.R. Park

New Delhi – 110 019                                                       ….Opponent

 

Date of Institution: 21.05.2013

Judgment Reserved on: 24.08.2017

Judgment Passed on: 25.08.2017

CORUM:

Sh. Sukhdev Singh (President)

Dr. P.N. Tiwari  (Member)

 

Order By : Sh. Sukhdev Singh (President)

 

 

JUDGEMENT

          This complaint has been filed by Mrs. Sushma Rani Negi against M/s. Arun Dev Builders (OP) under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. 

2.       The facts in brief are that the complainant booked a plot on 04.02.20117 by depositing Rs. 25,000/- vide cheque no.597243 dated 04.02.2007 being the registration amount in a project at Mandawar, Haridwar.  She was issued a receipt no. 3941 dated 18.02.2007.  At the time of registration, she was assured to be given the possession within a period of 24 months from the date of application.  She made a payment of Rs. 1,25,000/-, but the respondent could not start his project. 

          In the month of November, 2012, she visited the office of respondent and asked for refund of deposited amount.  She did not get any satisfactory reply.  Thus, she has stated that this conduct of the respondent was illegal, uncalled, unwarranted and against natural justice.  She also stated to have suffered mental agony and pain.  Hence, she has prayed for refund of Rs. 1,25,000/- with 21% interest since 2007; compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- towards harassment, mental agony and pain and Rs. 25,000/- cost of litigation.

3.       In the WS, filed on behalf of M/s. Arun Dev Builders (OP), they have stated that the complaint was of a civil nature, which was not covered under the Consumer Protection Act.  They have admitted the booking of the plot on payment of Rs. 25,000/- as registration amount.  They have denied the complainant having paid an amount of          Rs. 1,25,000/-.

4.       The complainant in her rejoinder to the Written Statement has controverted the pleas made in their written statement and have reasserted her pleas made in the complaint.

5.       In support of its complaint, the complainant has examined herself.  She has deposed on affidavit.  She has also placed on record the documents in respect of booking of plot alongwith payment of receipts. 

          No evidence has been filed on behalf of OP.

5.       We have heard the Ld. Counsel for complainant as counsel for OP did not appear.  It has been argued on behalf of complainant that since there has been delay in handing over the possession, the complainant was entitled for refund of amount alongwith compensation.  With regard to the plea taken by OP in their WS, complaint being of a civil nature, he has argued that his complaint was covered under the Consumer Protection Act and by not giving possession, OP have committed deficiency. 

          With regard to complaint being of a civil nature, the law is well settled that the builders are the service providers and by booking a plot/flat, the complainant was covered under the Consumer Protection Act, being the consumer.  Therefore, the plea of OP that the complaint was of a civil nature and was not covered under the CPA cannot be accepted.

          Coming to the evidence, placed on record, it is admitted by OP that complainant have booked the plot, which is also evident from the application showing that she has booked the plot and have paid an amount of Rs. 25,000/- as registration amount.  Further, receipts issued by OP from time to time also show that she has made a total payment for an amount of Rs. 1,25,000/-.  The fact that possession of plot has not been handed over by OP and they have apologized through letter of dated 02.12.2011, addressed to the complainant, certainly, there has been delay which amounts to deficiency on the part of OP.  When there has been deficiency on the part of OP, certainly, the complainant is entitled for refund of amount.  Not only that, by not delivering the possession and having retained the amount of Rs. 1,25,000/- for a considerable period, the complainant have suffered mental pain and agony, for which she has to be compensated. 

          In view of the above, it is ordered that OP shall refund an amount of Rs. 1,25,000/- with 9% interest from January, 2012.  The complainant is further awarded an amount of Rs. 50,000/- on account of compensation for mental agony and pain, which includes the cost of litigation also. 

          This order be complied within a period of 45 days, if not complied, the compensation amount of Rs. 50,000/- shall also carry 9% interest from the date of order.    

          Copy of the order be supplied to the parties as per rules.

          File be consigned to Record Room.

 

(DR. P.N. TIWARI)                                                             (SUKHDEV SINGH)

     Member                                                                                   President