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.441/2013

SH. TEK BAHADUR THAPA

S/O SH. PRASAD BAHADUR THAPA

R/O B-160, JHARERA VILLAGE,

DELHI CANTT.,

DELHI-110010

…………. COMPLAINANT                                                                                     

                                    VS.

M/S ARUN DEV BUILDERS LTD.,

THROUGH ITS DIRECTORS SH. SHYAM BHARDWAJ

AND SH. PAWAN KUMAR SHARMA

612 HOLY CHOWK, DEVLI, KHANPUR,

NEW DELHI-110062

      …………..RESPONDENT

                                                                                             Date of Order: 30.08.2016

O R D E R

A.S. Yadav – President

In brief complainant booked a flat in the project of OP at Yamuna Apartment, Holy Chowk, Devli, Khanpur, New Delhi measuring 596.5 sq. ft. @ Rs.3200/- sq. ft.  Initially complainant paid Rs.1 lakh and Rs.4 lakhs on 23.9.12 and 08.10.12 respectively i.e. a total sum of Rs.5 lakhs was deposited by the complainant.  The total cost of the said flat was Rs.18,69,056/-. 

It is stated that it was verbally and mutually agreed between the OP and the complainant that the complainant will pay Rs.6 lakhs more and the OP will get the loan sanctioned from any scheduled bank for the remaining amount i.e. approximately 7,70,000/-.  OP has taken all the necessary documents from the complainant for getting the said loan sanctioned but OP failed to get the loan sanctioned though OP got the loan sanctioned for some other purchasers.

.

It is stated that it is a clear cut case of deficiency in service on the part of OP.  Complainant has prayed for refund of the amount paid by him to OP alongwith interest.

OP filed the reply.

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

In fact reply filed by OP is quite evasive.  Complainant has already paid Rs.5 lakhs to the OP but OP has not got the loan sanctioned for the complainant.  In fact in letter dated 06.06.2013, complainant has specifically stated that “complainant asked OP regarding refund of the amount and he was asked to wait till May 2013.  Thereafter in April 2013 he was called in the office of OP whereby he was informed that Punjab and Sind Bank denied the home loan for a apartment as land is at lal dora and OP has applied for loan in Bank of India for which for more documents are required from complainant.  Complainant submitted the documents.”  The fact remains that the loan was never arranged.  It is a clear cut case of deficiency in service on the part of the OP.

OP is directed to refund the amount of Rs.5,00,000/- alongwith 9% interest p.a. from the date of filing of complaint plus Rs.10,000/- as compensation and Rs.5,000/- towards litigation expenses. 

            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