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.596/2012
MS. NIDHI MALHOTRA
PRESENTLY R/O FLAT NO.-101,
298A/4 VAISHALI,
GHAZIABAD-201010
…………. COMPLAINANT
Vs.
M/S ARUN DEV BUILDERSLIMITED,
THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR,
CORPORATE OFFICE F-89/11,
OKHLA, PHASE-I,
NEW DELHI-110020
…………..RESPONDENT
Date of Order: 08.02.2016
O R D E R
A.S. Yadav – President
The case of the complainant is that OP launched a residential flats Project namely Dev City Bhiwadi, Rajasthan. Complainant booked a flat measuring 610 sq. yds. in the said project on 26.11.2007 vide registration No.61753 and paid a sum of Rs.60,000/- at the time of booking the flat.
Complainant paid a total sum of Rs.2,50,000/- to OP. As per terms and conditions of the allotment of flat, the proposed project was to be completed within a period of 36 months from the date of registration.
Complainant made inquiries from OP’s Project Site Officer regarding progress of the project from time to time and lastly on 30.6.10 but it was found that no construction started on proposed project.
Under these circumstance complainant expressed her desire to cancel the allotment and refund of her amount. On 02.7.10 OP asked complainant to hand over the original receipts. Accordingly complainant handed over original receipts of Rs.2,50,000/- to OP and OP assured to refund her amount as early as possible. As per settlement dated 02.07.2010 OP deposited a sum of Rs.25,000/- towards refund into the account of complainant on 29.8.11 and a sum of Rs.20,000/- on 19.12.2011 and thereafter no amount was refunded. OP is guilty of unfair trade practice and patently deficient services. OP sent a legal notice on 12.11.2012 however despite service of legal notice, no payment was made. It is prayed that OP be directed to pay a sum of RS.2,05,000/- to complainant alongwith interest @ 12% per annum from 26.11.2007 and to pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation and Rs.25,000/- as litigation expenses.
OP in the reply took the plea that this Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain the present complaint as the property in question is situated in Bhiwadi, Rajasthan. Moreover, complainant is not a consumer. It is also stated that the complaint is barred by limitation. As per complaint, possession was to be handed over in November 2010 and the cause of action arose on 27.11.10 whereas the complaint has been filed after two years i.e. December 2012. On merit, it is stated that complainant has committed default in making the payment. It is denied that no construction of flats was found rather flats were ready for delivery of possession. It is denied that OP promised to refund the amount. It is not disputed that application for refund was field by complainant alongwith documents. On the request of complainant for her social need, an amount of Rs.25000/- was transferred to the account of complainant . It was not towards the refund of the amount. It is prayed that the complaint be dismissed.
We have heard Ld. Counsel of parties and carefully perused the record.
It is not disputed that complainant booked a flat in the project of OP and paid Rs.2,50,000/-. It is proved on record that on 02.07.10 as desired by OP, complainant moved an application for refund of the amount of Rs.2,50,000/- and deposited the original receipts. In fact OP has agreed to refund the amount as is evident from the fact that after handing over of the original documents on 02.07.10, OP refunded a sum of Rs.25,000/- on 29.8.11 and a sum of RS.20,000/- on 19.12.11 but no amount has been refunded thereafter. The contention of OP that an amount of Rs.25,000/- was given to complainant for her social needs, there cannot be any other bigger lie than this. There is nothing on the record to show that complainant has ever asked for a sum of Rs.25,000/- from OP for her social needs. It is not accepted from a company like OP to stoop so low. Complainant has specifically stated that no construction was going on the spot. OP denied the same and stated that the flats were constructed and ready for delivery of possession.
OP has not placed anything on record to show that they have obtained necessary permission for construction of flats. OP has not placed completion certificate on record that indeed the flats were ready for delivery of possession meaning thereby that OP has miserably failed to prove that flats were duly constructed. There has been a deficiency in service on the part of OP.
So far as jurisdiction of this Forum is concerned, complainant is not seeking possession of the flat and only seeking the refund of the amount. The entire transaction took place within the territorial jurisdiction of this Forum hence this Forum got jurisdiction to entertain the complaint.
So far as the contention of OP that complaint is bared by limitation is concerned, it is significant to note that a sum of Rs.20,000/- was refunded on 19.12.11 and thereafter the amount was not refunded. The cause of action arose on 19.12.11 and the present complaint was filed in December 2012 very much within limitation.
Complainant is a consumer as he has paid Rs.2,50,000/-. OP has not handed over the possession of the flat within promised time hence complainant sought refund of the amount. OP agreed to refund the amount but paid only part payment of Rs.45,000/-. Rest of the amount i.e. Rs.2,05,000/- has not been refunded. It is clear cut case of deficiency in service on the part of OP.
OP is directed to refund the amount of Rs.2,05,000/- alongwith interest @ 10% p.a. from the date of filing of complaint and also 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) (A.S. YADAV)
MEMBER PRESIDENT
