DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SAHIBZADA AJIT SINGH NAGAR (MOHALI)
Consumer Complaint No.206 of 2016
Date of institution: 18.04.2016 Date of decision : 28.08.2017
Satwinder Singh son of Raghbir Singh resident of village Chalaki, Tehsil Morinda, District Ropar.
……..Complainant
Versus
M/s. Bajwa Developers Limited, through its Managing Director Shri Jarnail Singh Bajwa, Office at Sunny Enclave, Desu Majra, Tehsil Kharar, District Mohali.
………. Opposite Party
Complaint under Section 12 of
the Consumer Protection Act.
Quorum
Shri Ajit Pal Singh Rajput, President
Amrinder Singh Sidhu, Member.
Present: Shri J.S. Thablan, counsel for the complainant.
Shri Kulwinder Singh, counsel for the OP.
ORDER
By Ajit Pal Singh Rajput, President
Complainant Satwinder Singh has filed this complaint against the Opposite Party (hereinafter referred to as the OP) under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act. The brief facts of the complaint are as under:
2. The complainant booked 1 BHK BR No. (1422) apartment having apartment No.1622 at Sunny Apartment F21, Sector 74-A-117 at Mohali measuring 450 sq. ft. with the OP for a total sale consideration of Rs.12,50,100/- which was rounded off to Rs.12,52,000/-. The complainant had paid initial amount of Rs.2,00,000/- on 26.04.2011 receipt thereof was duly issued by the OP. Thereafter an amount of Rs.1,12,500/- was paid by the complainant to the OP in cash and dated 06.07.2011 was issued by the OP. An agreement to sell was executed between the parties on 07.07.2011. Entry of the payments received by the OP was also made in the buyers agreement. The remaining amount was to be paid to the OP in 5 installments @ Rs.1,87,800/- each as per the payment plan mentioned in the Buyers Agreement. The complainant did not make payment of the rest of installments as there was no construction/development made by the OP. The OP has also not raised any demand for making further payments. The complainant is always willing and is still ready to make the payment provided the flat is handed over to the complainant. As per the buyers agreement, the possession of the residential unit was to be handed over to the complainants latest by 07.01.2013. The complainant also came to know that certain permissions were pending which are necessary for approval of the project. The complainant made number of calls and also visited the office of the OP but never got a satisfactory response. The complainant also came to know from the newspaper Hindustan Times that GMADA has refused to authorize the area of Sunny Apartments. Thus, feeling aggrieved the complainant sent a legal notice dated 30.01.2016 to the OP which has not been replied by the OP. The OP is using the funds of the complainant for other profitable business and earning profits which amounts to unfair trade practice. Hence this complaint for giving directions to the OP to refund the deposited amount of Rs.3,12,500/- alongwith interest @ 18% per annum from the dates of payment; compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- for harassment and stress and Rs.44,000/- as litigation expenses.
3. The complaint is contested by the OP by filing reply, in which it had raised certain preliminary objections, inter alia, that the complainant has committed default in making payments of installments, as per agreement an amount Rs.3,12,500/- deposited by the complainant is liable to be forfeited. The complainant is stopped by his own act and conduct to file the complaint. Approvals of the project are under process and it will take time for getting the approval and handing over the possession of the flat. LOI was received by the OP from the GMADA on 19.05.2014. The complainant had paid some amount out of Rs.12,52,000/- and as per terms of the agreement, the amount of biana is liable to be forfeited. On merits, the OP has denied the averments of the complaint and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
4. In order to prove the case, the counsel tendered in evidence affidavit of the complainant No.1 as Ex. CW-1/1; copies of receipt Ex.C-1; agreement to sell Ex.C-2; photographs Ex.C-3 to C-6; legal notice Ex.C-7; postal receipt Ex.C-8; CLU Ex.C-9; RTI application alongwith reply Ex.C-10 and reply to RTI application Ex.C-11. In rebuttal, counsel for the OP tendered in evidence affidavit of Jarnail Singh Bajwa, MD Ex.OP-1/1.
5. It has been argued by learned counsel for the complainant that 1 BHK BR No. (1422) apartment having apartment No.1622 at Sunny Apartment F21, Sector 74-A-117 at Mohali measuring 450 sq. ft. with the OP for a total sale consideration of Rs.12,50,100/- which was rounded off to Rs.12,52,000/-. Learned counsel has argued that the complainant had paid a total sum of Rs.3,12,500/- to the OP as per the agreement to sell dated 07.07.2011. Learned counsel for the complainant has argued that the complainant visited the OP number of times but no satisfactory reply regarding handing over the possession of the apartment was given to him. Learned counsel has thus prayed that the amount deposited by the complainant may be got refunded alongwith interest and compensation for mental agony, harassment besides costs of litigation.
6. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the OP has contended that the complainants have committed default in making payment of installments as per agreement to sell dated 07.07.2011. Learned counsel for the OP further argued that all the necessary approvals and sanctions for the project in question are under process and there is no deficiency in service on the part of the OP.
7. We have gone through the pleadings, evidence and written arguments of the parties and heard the oral submissions addressed by their learned counsel. We are of the opinion that in the present case the complainant had paid Rs.3,12,500/- to the OP on different dates towards sale consideration of the apartment. As per the agreement to sell dated 07.07.2011 Ex.C-2 the possession of the apartment was to be handed over to the complainants by 07.01.2013. The complainant has stated that there is no development at the site and they have proved photographs Ex.C-3 to C-6 in support of this contention. The OP has not been able to produce any record to prove that the construction work is complete and it had offered the possession to the complainants before the stipulated date. Thus, the complainant is entitled to receive the deposited amount alongwith interest. The Hon’ble State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in Ms. Sneh Sood Vs. M/s. Bajwa Developers Ltd. in Consumer Complaint No.240 of 2016 decided on 23.02.2017 has ordered refund of the deposited amount of the complainant alongwith interest @ 12% per annum from the different dates of deposit of different amounts till the date of actual refund.
8. Accordingly, in view of our aforesaid discussion, we direct the OP to refund the deposited amount of Rs.3,12,500/- (Rs. Three Lakhs Twelve Thousand Five Hundred only) to the complainant alongwith interest @ 12% per annum from the different dates of deposit of different amounts till the date of actual refund. We also find that complainant is entitled to a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rs. Twenty five thousand only) on account of mental agony due to the negligent act of the OP and litigation cost of Rs.10,000/- (Rs. Ten thousand only). The present complaint stands allowed accordingly.
The OP is further directed to comply with the order of this Forum within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order, failing which the amount of compensation awarded shall carry interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of this order till realisation.
The arguments on the complaint were heard and the order was reserved. Now the order be communicated to the parties. Copy of the order be sent to the parties free of cost and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room.
Pronounced
Dated: 28.08.2017
(A.P.S.Rajput)
President
(Amrinder Singh Sidhu)
Member
