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.591/2012
SHRI SAJAL TIWARI
S/O SHRI V.N. TIWARI
R/O BLOCK NO.7, FLAT NO.8,
RAMESH NAGAR,
NEW DELHI
…………. COMPLAINANT
VS.
M/S ARUN DEV BUILDERS LTD.,
F-88/11, OKHLA PHASE-I,
NEW DELHI
THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR
SHRI PRAVEEN BHARDAWAJ
………….. RESPONDENT
Date of Order:06.07.2015
O R D E R
A.S. Yadav – President
In brief the case of complainant is that he booked a plot measuring 100 sq. yards in the project of OP at Sahahpura in Rajasthan and initially made payment of Rs.50,000/- vide cheque No.534830 dated 15.12.2006 and subsequently made a payment of Rs.50,000/- vide cheque No.608133 dated 29.5.2007 towards first instalment. Complainant did not receive any information about the progress of the project even after more than six years from the date of booking i.e. 15.12.2006. In fact during his visit at the site, complainant came to know that project has not been started yet and OP has already refunded booking amount to various persons. Complainant also requested for refund of booking amount but he did not get the refund. It is stated that it is a clear cut case of deficiency in service on the part of OP.
OP admitted about the receiving of Rs.50,000/- as booking amount on 15.12.2006 but regarding the payment of first instalment it is stated that complainant be put to strict proof. OP also took the plea that this Forum has no jurisdiction as the property in question is situated in Rajasthan and also the complaint is barred by time as the money was deposited in December 2006 and May 2007 and the complaint has been filed in November 2012. It is further stated that there is no deficiency in service on the part of OP as he was ready to hand over the possession provided the entire amount is paid by the complainant.
We have heard Ld. Counsels for the parties and carefully perused the record. It is very strange that on one hand OP is admitting the payment of Rs.50,000/- only and regarding amount of Rs.50,000/- as first instalment OP is taking the plea that complainant be put to strict proof, on the other hand in para 4 of the Preliminary Objections of the WS OP is stating that complaint is time barred as the money was deposited in December 2006 and May 2007 meaning thereby that payment of Rs.50,000/- in May 2007 is admitted. Even otherwise complainant has placed on record the statement of account which clearly shows that an amount of Rs.50,000/- paid to OP vide cheque No.608133. It is proved beyond doubt that complainant paid Rs.1 lakh to OP. The contention of OP that he is ready to hand over the possession provided the entire amount is paid by the complainant to the OP is concerned, OP has not placed anything on record to show that OP has ever written to complainant that project is complete and willing to hand over the possession of the plot.
So far as jurisdiction of this Forum is concerned, it is admitted fact that the corporate office of the OP is at Chittranjan Park, New Delhi. Payment of Rs.50,000/- towards initial booking amount has been received at this office. The receipt has been issued by the aforesaid office, accordingly this Forum has jurisdiction to entertain the aforesaid complaint. The complaint is not barred by limitation as it was the duty of the OP to hand over the possession of the plot and when OP failed to do so complainant sought the refund of the amount paid by him. Complaint is very much within limitation. Complainant has proved deficiency in service on the part of OP.
OP is directed to refund to complainant Rs.1 lakh with interest @ 9% p.a. from May 2007. OP is also directed to pay Rs.10,000/- as compensation and Rs.3,000/- towards litigation expenses.
Let the order be complied 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.
(EHTESHAM-UL-HAQ) (A.S. YADAV)
MEMBER PRESIDENT
