Case No.CC/219/2018

           Date of Institution:- 23.05.2018

            Order Reserved on :-02.05.2024

           Date of Order :- 27.05.2024

IN THE MATTER OF:

Mr. Raj Kumar Gupta

S/o Late J. P. Gupta

R/o Flat No.41, ManavVihar Apartments,

Sector-15, Rohini, Delhi – 110089.

          …..Complainant

VERSUS

1. M/s.ArunDev Builders Ltd.

Having its registered office at:

612, Devli Village

Near Holy Chowk, South Delhi,

New Delhi – 110062.

2. Mr. ManojBhardwaj

(Managing Director, ArunDev Builders Ltd.)

B-8, Raju Park, New Delhi – 110062.

3. Mrs. NeenaBhardwaj

(Director, ArunDev Builders Ltd.)

B-8, Raju Park, New Delhi – 110062.

4. Mr. Praveen Bhardwaj

(Director, ArunDev Builders Ltd.)

B-8, Raju Park, New Delhi – 110062.

5. Mr. Jagdish Chand

(Director, ArunDev Builders Ltd.)

R/o 37, Hauz Rani, Malviya Nagar,

New Delhi – 110017.

… Opposite Parties

O R D E R

Per R. C. YADAV , MEMBER

1. The present complaint has been filed under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (in short CP Act) against Opposite Parties(in short OP) alleging deficiency of service. The brief facts of the case are thatOP-1 is a private limited company registered under Companies Act, 1956.   The OP No. 2 to 5 is Director of the OP-1.  The complainant has booked a residential plot D-1839 admeasuring 100 sq. yd. plot in “ArunDev City” Roorkee, Haridwar on NH-88 vide allotment letter dated 15.04.2007 and paid Rs.3,19,100/- (Rupees Three Lakh Nineteen Thousand One Hundred).  The complainant has visited the site in March, 2017 and shocked to see and know that the plot no. D-1839 which is located at Ganga River Bed and nearby site of the plot is having dense sand and the present staff on site was not even able to locate the plot on spot.  The OP-1 had allotted plot no. D-1839 which was located at Ganga River Bed but the plot was situated at dense sand.  The complainant has immediately lodged his protest about the same to the OP but the OP had not given any response.   The complainant has booked the plot @ Rs.3191/- per sq. yd. and the complainant has paid total amount to Rs.2,36,382/- (Rupees Two Lakh Thirty Six Thousand Three Hundred Eighty Two) till 18.06.2007, the same can be corroborated by the letter dated 15.03.2010 issued by the OP-1.  The OP has changed the earlier allotted plot no. D-1839 to plot no. C-39 without consent from the complainant.  The complainant had inquired about the status of the work and the necessary sanction and approvals from the competent authority but the OP has not confirmed the details with the complainant. The complainant has sent a legal notice dated 25.01.2018 to the OP but OP has not responded to the complainant.   The complainant has requested the OP for refund of his deposited amount but in vain.  The complainant came to know that OP has not obtained any approval for the development and construction from the concerned authority.  The OP has miserably failed to discharge their duty and as a result of which the complainant has suffered mentally and financially. Hence, the present complaint.
2. The complainant prayed for refund of Rs.2,36,382/- (Rupees Two Lakh Thirty Six Thousand Three Hundred Eighty Two)alongwith interest @ 18% p.a. and Rs.2,00,000/- towards mental harassment and the costs of the present complaint.
3. Notice was issued to OP who did not appear before this Commission despite adequate service through publication towards which the complainant has filed an affidavit and the newspapers in which the notice was reflected dated 09.09.2022. The OPsNo.1 to 5 were proceeded Ex-parte vide order dated 06.01.2023.  The complainant has filed Ex-Parte affidavit of evidence and written arguments in support his case.
4. The matter was listed for final arguments on 02.05.2024. We have heard arguments from Sh. Manoj Gupta, Ld. Counsel for complainant, OPs were Ex-Parte and the case was reserved for order.
5. We have carefully considered the material on record and thoroughly perused the documents placed on record by the complainant.
6. It is the case of the complainant that he had booked a residential plot D-1839 admeasuring 100 sq. yd. plot in “ArunDev City” Roorkee, Haridwar on NH-88 vide allotment letter dated 15.04.2007 and paid Rs.2,36,382/- (Rupees Two Lakh Thirty Six Thousand Three Hundred Eighty Two) to the OP in different occasions as per demanded by OP.  However, the complainant asked for possession of plot, the OP get delaying on one pretext or the other and no possession was delivered to the complainant. The case of the complainant is supported by the documents and allotment letter, payment receipt.The case of complainant does not suffer from any factual or legal defect. The allegations made by the complainant have gone unchallenged, uncontested and as such whatever has been placed on record is believed.
7. From the facts of the case, evidences and material on record, it is clear that OP had received Rs.2,36,382/- (Rupees Two Lakh Thirty Six Thousand Three Hundred Eighty Two)from the complainant. But despite payment of the amount, the possession of the plot was not handed over to him. The complainant has stated that when he did not get possession of the plot, he asked for a refund of the deposited amount with interest. The OP did not address his grievance despite repeated requests and correspondence. He, therefore, filed the present complaint for non-delivery of possession of the booked plot on receipt of consideration/booked amount within reasonable time.

“ArifurRehman Khan Vs. DLF Southern Home Pvt. Ltd. (2020) 16 SCC 512” is the authority on this point.

8. As the OPsare Ex-Parte, the allegations made by the complainant have gone unchallenged, uncontested and unrebutted, and hence we find no reason to disbelieve the complainant’s averments. The complainant has annexed all the documents with his complaint to corroborate his sworn testimony which is paid amount to Rs.2,36,382/- (Rupees Two Lakh Thirty Six Thousand Three Hundred Eighty Two).However, the OP neither handed over the possession of the plotsnor refunded the amount to the complainant. This act apparently and clearly constitutes deficiency in service, monopolistic and unfair trade practice on part of the OP.
9. Accordingly, we allow the complaint and direct the OP to refund Rs.2,36,382/- (Rupees Two Lakh Thirty Six Thousand Three Hundred Eighty Two)to the complainant alongwth an interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of deposited moneyandRs.40,000/- (Rupees Forty Thousand) as lumpsum for mental agony and litigation charges within 45 days from receipt of the orders failing which OP shall be liable to pay entire amount alongwithinterest @ 9% p.a. till realization.

• Copy of the order be given/sent to the parties as per rule.
• The file be consigned to Record Room.
• Announce in the open Court on 27.05.2024.