CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM – X

GOVERNMENT OF N.C.T. OF DELHI

Udyog Sadan, C – 22 & 23, Institutional Area

(Behind Qutub Hotel)

New Delhi – 110 016

Case No.262/2012

SMT. ASHA CHAUHAN

W/O SH. DEEPAK CHAUHAN,

R/O J-83, RAMA PARK ROAD,

MOHAN GARDEN, UTTAM NAGAR,

NEAR DWARKA MORE,

NEW DELHI-110059

…………. COMPLAINANT                                                                                     

                                    VS.

M/S ARUN DEV BUILDERS LIMITED,

CORPORATE OFF:-

F-1211, CHITTARANJAN PARK,

NEW DELHI-110009

      …………..RESPONDENT

Date of Order:14.01.2016

O R D E R

A.S. Yadav – President

The case of the complainant is that she booked a plot measuring 100 sq. yards @ Rs.3501/- in the project of OP at Bhiwadi.  Complainant paid a sum of Rs.90,000/- towards registration on 08.08.08.  The rest of the amount was to be paid in 83 instalment of Rs.3,000/- each and the final instalment was of Rs.1100/-.  Complainant paid a sum of Rs.57,000/- towards instalments and after making the payment, she approached OP and requested to show the land and hand over the possession.  OP kept on putting off the complainant on one or the other pretext.  Ultimately complainant sent a letter dated 21.02.11 to OP followed by its reminder dated 08.03.11 requesting them to deliver the possession but with no response.  Thereafter complainant visited the corporate office of OP number of times but possession was not handed over rather OP asked complainant to take the plot in Faridabad instead of Bhiwadi but complainant did not agree for that.  In fact OP was not in possession of any land in Bhiwadi rather they have falsely allured the public at large and cheated them in this manner.  It is submitted that OP has not refunded the amount  hence there is deficiency in service on the part of OP.  It is prayed that OP be directed to refund Rs.1,47,000/- alongwith interest @ 12% p.a. and Rs.5 lakh for compensation.

OP in its reply has not disputed the amount received from the complainant.  Further it is stated that the present complaint is premature as the possession was to be handed over after three years.  It is further stated that complainant has not paid the full amount and there was no deficiency on the part of OP.  The receipt of notice dated 21.2.11 and 08.3.11 are denied.

It is significant to note that complainant in para 5 of complaint has specifically stated that in fact OP was not having any land in Bhiwadi and therefore offered a plot at Faridabad which was declined by complainant.  This was not denied by OP.  Reply filed by OP is quite vague and evasive.  Once complainant has stated in the complaint that OP was not having any land in Bhiwadi, the onus was on OP to prove on record that OP was having land at Bhiwadi and had obtained the requisite permission from the appropriate govt. and about the stage of construction but OP has hot furnished any such information to complainant.  It is clear cut case of deficiency in service on the part of OP.

OP is directed to refund a sum of Rs.1,47,000/- alongwith interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of filing of the complaint.  OP is further directed to pay Rs.10,000/- as compensation and Rs.5,000/- towards litigation expenses.

Let the order be complied with within one month of the receipt thereof.  The complaint stands disposed of accordingly.

Copy of order be sent to the parties, free of cost, and thereafter file be consigned to record room.

                 (D.R. TAMTA)                                                      (A.S. YADAV)

                     MEMBER                                                           PRESIDENT