Delhi

North East

CC/125/2018

Smt. Lalita - Complainant(s)

Versus

Arun Dev Builders Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

23 Feb 2023

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION: NORTH-EAST

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

D.C. OFFICE COMPLEX, BUNKAR VIHAR, NAND NAGRI, DELHI-93

 

Complaint Case No. 125/18

 

 

In the matter of:

 

	Smt. Lalita W/o Sh. Saudan Singh R/o B-6/273, ATM SBI Nand Nagri Delhi-110093	Complainant
	Versus
	M/s.  Arun Dev Builders Ltd F01211, Chitranjan Park New Delhi-110019 (Through its Principal Officer/Director)   Also at:-   F-89/11, Okhla Industrial Area Phase-I, New Delhi-110020	Opposite Party

 

DATE OF INSTITUTION:           JUDGMENT RESERVED ON:            DATE OF ORDER:

07.07.18 21.09.22 23.02.23

 

CORAM:

Surinder Kumar Sharma, President

Anil Kumar Bamba, Member

ORDER

      Anil Kumar Bamba, Member

The Complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer protection Act, 1986.

Case of the Complainant

1. The facts of the case as revealed from the record are that the Complainant had booked a flat with Opposite Party No.1 measuring to 100 Sq’yard @ 3191/- per Sq’ yard in residential project namely “Arun Dev City” and the total cost of the plot is Rs. 3,72,485/-. The Complainant stated that he had submitted a sum of Rs. 47,500/- vide cheque bearing no. 793415 dated 20.09.06  for which Opposite Party had issued a receipt on 23.09.06 and after that the Opposite Party started issuing demand letters and a sum of Rs. 3,72,666/- had been deposited by the Complainant. The details of the deposit are as under:-

Date	Amout (Rs.)
23.09.2006	47,500/-
30.11.2006	57,000/-
27.02.2007	60,000/-
02.06.2007	57,000/-
07.06.2015 (Transfer from Sh. Rajpal from his registration no 27432 to the registration number 4031 pertaining to the Complainant)	1,11,666/-
15.10.2015	14,000/-
03.11.2015	25,000/-
Total	3,72,166/-

 

2. The Complainant submitted that Opposite Party No.2 had promised him to give the possession of the plot within one year as mentioned in booking plan and thereafter the Opposite Party got signed by the Complainant a letter in which percentage of extra charges were mentioned in case the Complainant wanted the plot on preferential location. The Complainant stated that vide speed post letter dated 09.11.06, the Complainant sought Opposite Party No.1 for particulars of  Khasra Khatauni  under which the land of Opposite Party No.1 falls and requested it to show the site. In spite of providing the details, Opposite Party No.1 vide it’s letter dated 09.11.06 desired the Complainant to contact at their office. Vide letter dated 06.03.07. Opposite Party No.1 informed the Complainant of giving allotment of first phase on 15 March 07 and second instalment was demanded from the Complainant. Complainant  vide it’s letter dated 20.03.07 requested Opposite Party No.1 to provide park facing plot and agreed to pay 2 percent as extra charges. Opposite Party No.1 allotted the plot bearing no. D-302 in Arun Dev City in Roorkee, Haridwar  admeasuring 100 Sq’ yard. The Complainant submitted that vide letter dated 02.01.09 give details of total payment made by her and also requested to grant the refund @ Rs. 3,000/- per lac  till the plot is allotted. Opposite Party No.1 vide it’s letter dated 06.01.09 replied that compensating the customers @ 3,000/- per month per lac to booking of flats only. After long time, the Opposite Party No.1 issued a letter dated 03.10.15 to Complainant. Vide  the said letter, Opposite Party had converted the plot no. from D-302 to      C-147 and demanded Rs. 48,685/-. That thereafter, vide letter dated 14.10.15 the Opposite Party revised the calculation of total amount payable by Complainant from Rs. 48,685/- to Rs. 29,714/-. That on 15.10.15 the Opposite Party had issued a No Objection Certificate in the name of the Complainant.  On 27.10.15, Opposite Party issued a letter confirming the Complainant to give Title deeds of the plot no. C-147 admeasuring 100 Sq’ yard for total consideration of Rs. 3,44,166/- and the Complainant had deposited Rs. 3,30,166/- and Rs. 14,000/- vide cash on 15.10.15. The Complainant stated that on 28.11.15 he received another letter from Opposite Party stating that they had executed the Title Deeds of plot No.   C-147 and demanded Rs. 1,32,000/- on account of EDC, IDC etc. The Complainant  through her husband filed an application under the RTI Act 2005, before the ld. Governor, Uttarakhand.
3. That the ld.  PIO, o/o Haridwar-Roorkee Development Authority, Branch office vide his letter dated 04.02.16 and ld. PIO/ Asstt. Planner, Dehradoon of aforesaid RTI application and enclosed a copy of letter no. 789 dated 15.03.13 from the letter 789 dated 15.04.13, the Complainant was shocked to know that the approval earlier granted to the Opposite Party for the development of land at Roorkee vide letter No.771 dated 09.04.08 has been cancelled vide letter no.789 dated 15.04.13 for the reason that the Opposite Party had violated the provisions of RHD guidelines by selling the plots in Block C & D whereas the approvals were granted only for selling the plots in block A and B of the said project. On 03.11.15, Opposite Party executed a Sale Deed from one Sh. B.D Joshi in favour of Complainant in respect of plot C- 147 which falls in Block-C whereas the approval stood cancelled by the competent authority in the year 2013. The Complainant approached many times the Opposite Party and vide letter dated 18.12.17 requested to refund her amount. Hence, this shows deficiency on the part of Opposite Party. Complainant has prayed for Rs. 11,57,326/- and to direct the Opposite Party to pay pende-lite and future interest till the date of realization.
4. None has appeared on behalf of Opposite Party to contest the case despite service of Dasti summon on 10.11.18 & 11.12.18 on its both address. Therefore, it was proceeded against Ex-parte vide order dated 09.08.19.

Ex-Parte Evidence of the Complainant

5. The Complainant in support of his complaint filed his affidavit wherein he has supported the averments made in the complaint.

 

 

Arguments and Conclusion

6. We have heard the Learned Counsel for the Complainant. We have also perused the file and the Ex-parte written arguments filed by the Complainant. The averments made by the Complainant in the complaint are supported by his affidavit and documents filed by him. The Opposite Party did not appear and did not file any written statement. Therefore, the averments made in the complaint are to be believed.
7. In view of the above discussion, the complaint is allowed. Opposite Party is directed to pay the amount in question i.e. 3,72,166/- to the complainant along with interest @ 6 % p.a. from the date of filing the complaint till recovery. Opposite Party is further directed to pay an amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- on account of mental harassment and Rs. 25,000/- on account of litigation charges along with interest @ 6 % p.a. from the date of this order till recovery.
8. Order announced on 23.02.23.

Copy of this order be given to the parties free of cost.

File be consigned to Record Room.

 

(Anil Kumar Bamba)           Member

(Surinder Kumar Sharma) President