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.188/2013

SHRI DESH PAL SINGH

S/O LATE SH. R.C. YADAV

R/O 9-E, RAILWAY QUARTER,

MAHAVAT KHAN ROAD,  

NEW DELHI-110002

AT PRESENT:- C-1/67-B, KESHAV PURAM,

LAWRENCE ROAD, NEW DELHI-110035

                                    …………. COMPLAINANT                                                                                           

                                                Vs.

M/S ARUN DEV BUILDERS LTD.,

F-1211, CHITRANJAN PARK, NEW DELHI-110019

THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN/AUTHORISED SIGNATORY

                                    …………..RESPONDENT

AND

Case No.189/2013

SMT. JAISHREE AGGARWAL

W/O SH. ASHISH JAIN

R/O J-1/78, GROUND FLOOR, GUPTA COLONY,

KHIRKI EXTN., MALVIYA NAGAR, NEW DELHI-110017

ALSO AT: 1032, SECTOR 10 A,GURGAON-122001, HARYANA

…………. COMPLAINANT                                                                                           

                                                Vs.

M/S ARUN DEV BUILDERS LTD.,

F-1211, CHITRANJAN PARK, NEW DELHI-110019

THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN/AUTHORISED SIGNATORY

…………..RESPONDENT

Date of Order:17.08.2016

O R D E R

A.S. Yadav – President

By this order we shall dispose of the aforesaid complaints as the common question of fact and law is involved.  For the sake of reference, facts of case no.188/13 are detailed. 

In brief the complainant applied for a plot of land measuring 200 sq. yds. on 13.07.2009 in the “Dev City Bhiwadi” project of OP and deposited Rs.2,30,000/-.  Complainant also applied with the OP for allotment of another plot measuring 100 sq. yds by way of transfer on 20.12.08 and deposited Rs.85,000/- on 13.01.09.  Complainant paid a sum of Rs.1,42,000/- in all in respect of the plot of 100 sq. yds.

The case of the complainant is that OP neither developed the site nor handed over the possession of the said plot.  Complainant visited OP time and again but OP did not communicate anything about the further development of the project.  Finding no option, complainant sought refund of the amount and vide letter dated 29.10.12 complainant deposited the original receipts.  Complainant was assured that the refund will be sent directly into his account within 15 days.  He was forced to waive the right to claim interest.  Affidavit was also sought by the OP in this regard.  Till date the amount has been refunded.  It is stated that it is a clear cut case of deficiency in service on the part of OP.  It is prayed that OP be directed to refund the amount deposited with OP alongwith 18% interest and also to pay Rs.5 lakhs as compensation and Rs.20,000/- as litigation expenses.

OP in reply has not disputed about the amount deposited by the complainant.  OP has not filed any evidence.  Right of OP to file evidence was closed on 02.06.15.  OP in the reply took the plea that this Forum lacks territorial jurisdiction as the subject matter of the complaint is situated within Rajasthan.

We have heard Ld. Counsel for the parties and carefully perused the record.

So far as territorial jurisdiction of this Forum is concerned, it is significant to note that the entire payment has been received in the branch office of the OP at F-89/11, Okhla, Phase-1, New Delhi which is within the territorial jurisdiction of this Forum hence this Forum has got the territorial jurisdiction to entertain the present complaint.

Complainant has placed on record documents showing that vide letter dated 29.10.11, complainant has submitted the original documents with OP and OP has agreed to refund the amount within six to eight months.  This complaint was filed on 02.04.13 and till that date OP has not refunded the amount.  It is proved from the unchallenged testimony of complainant that the project was not developed.  It is significant to note that the amount was deposited in the year 2009 and till 2011, nothing was done.  Accordingly complainant was forced to seek refund of the amount.  Instead of refunding the amount, complainant was compelled to waive the right to claim interest even thereafter the amount was not refunded.  It is a clear cut case of deficiency in service on the part of OP.

In case No.188/13, OP is directed to refund Rs.2,30,000/- (for plot 200 sq. yds.) and Rs.1,42,000/- (for plot 100 sq. yds.) to complainant alongwith interest @ 9% p.a. from November 2011.  OP-1 is further directed to pay Rs.10,000/- towards compensation and Rs.5,000/- towards litigation expenses.

In case No.189/13, OP is directed to refund Rs.1,85,000/- to complainant alongwith interest @ 9% p.a. from September 2011.  OP-1 is further directed to pay Rs.10,000/- towards 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)                     (RITU GARODIA)                        (A.S. YADAV)

        MEMBER                               MEMBER                                  PRESIDENT