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.374/2011
SHRI LALIT SINGH RAWAT
S/O SH. T.S. RAWAT
R/O H1, NEW ADARSH APARTMENT,
PLOT NO.22, SECTOR-10,
DWARKA, NEW DELHI-110075
…………. COMPLAINANT
Vs.
M/S ARUN DEV BUILDERS LIMITED,
F-89/11, OKHLA INDUSTRIAL AREA,
PHASE-1, NEW DELHI-110020
…………..RESPONDENT
AND
Case No.375/2011
SHRI TEG SINGH RAWAT
S/O SH. GUSHAIN SINGH RAWAT
R/O H1, NEW ADARSH APARTMENT,
PLOT NO.22, SECTOR-10,
DWARKA, NEW DELHI-110075
…………. COMPLAINANT
Vs.
M/S ARUN DEV BUILDERS LIMITED,
F-89/11, OKHLA INDUSTRIAL AREA,
PHASE-1, NEW DELHI-110020
…………..RESPONDENT
Date of Order:23.09.2016
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.374/2011 are detailed.
In brief the case of the complainant is that he booked a flat measuring 450 sq. yards in the project of OP at Alwar, Bhiwadi, Bye-pass Road
(Rajasthan) and paid a total amount of Rs.1,03,000/-. As per the agreement between the parties, OP was to allot the above flat within 36 months from the date of registration failing which complainant was entitled to refund of his money from the OP alongwith interest @ 9% per annum from the date of payment. But OP failed to give the possession and even failed to give possession till 2010. Complainant requested OP either to hand over the possession of the flat or to refund the amount. Thereafter complainant surrendered the allotment and submitted all his papers to OP and OP assured that they will return the amount but the same was not done hence this complaint has been filed. Complainant prayed for refund of Rs.1,03,000/- with 9% interest as well as for award of Rs.1 lakh as compensation and Rs.21,000/- towards cost of litigation.
OP in reply took the plea that complainant is not a consumer and also that this Forum has no territorial jurisdiction to entertain the present complaint as the subject matter of this complaint is situated in district Alwar, Rajasthan. It is stated that OP was always ready to deliver the possession of the flat. It is prayed that complaint be dismissed.
We have heard Ld. Counsel for complainant and carefully perused the written submission of the parties.
It is significant to note that there is nothing on the record to suggest that OP has ever offered to give possession of the flat in question to the complainant. In fact the flat was booked in February 2007 and till 05.08.10 complainant moved an application for cancellation and original documents were surrendered. That application was duly received by OP. For more than 3½ years nothing was done by OP to show that they were ready to deliver the possession. It is a clear cut case of deficiency in service on the part of OP.
Complainant is a consumer and this Forum has got the territorial jurisdiction to entertain the present complaint as entire transaction took place in the branch office of OP which is situated in the territorial jurisdiction of this Forum.
In case No.374/2011, OP is directed to refund Rs.1,03,000/- alongwith interest @ 9% p.a. from September 2010. OP is further directed to pay Rs.15,000/- towards compensation and Rs.5000/- towards litigation expenses.
In case No.375/2011, OP is directed to refund Rs.1,99,000/- alongwith interest @ 9% p.a. from September 2010. OP is further directed to pay Rs.15,000/- towards compensation and Rs.5000/- 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
