DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM (CENTRAL)

    ISBT KASHMERE GATE DELHI

CC/173/2016

No. DF/ Central/

Shri Neeraj Garg

R/o House No. B – 4,

New Delhi - 110092

 VERSUS

1.  Mr. S.K. Singhal, Chairman 

     Carnation Developers Pvt. Ltd.,

     203, Caxton House,

     2 – E, Jhandewalan Extension,

     New Delhi – 110 055

2.  Rajat Singhal, Director

     Carnation Developers Pvt. Ltd.,

     E-127, Industrial Area

     Bhiwadil, Alwar, Rajasthan - 301019

3.  Ajay Kumar Agarwal, Director

     Carnation Developers Pvt. Ltd.

     H. No. 69, Village, Bhiwadi,

     Teh. Tizara, Distt. Alwar, Rajasthan  -  301019

4.  Kailash Gupta, Director

     Carnation Developers Pvt. Ltd.,

     4353/4C, 1^st Floor, Ansari Road,

     Darya Gnaj, New Delhi – 110002

5.  Carnation Developers Pvt. Ltd

     203, Caxton House,

     2 E Jhandewalan Extension,

     New Delhi - 110055

                                                                                          …..OPPOSITE PARTY                                                              

                                                           ORDER                                          

Rekha Rani, President

1.      Shri  Neeraj Garg  (in short the complainant)  filed  the instant complaint  U/s 12  of the Consumer Protection Act 1986  as amended up to date (in short

the Act)  pleading therein that he booked 2 BHK Flat of 690 sq. feet for a total

consideration of  Rs.17,25,000/- (Seventeen Lakh Twenty Five Thousand only)         in the project Krish City Heights, Bhiwadi of Carnation Developers Pvt. Ltd., (in short the OP) and made an advance payment of  Rs. 2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakh ) vide cheque no. 034122 drawn on State Bank of  India.  At the time of booking of the flat OP informed the complainant that the project will start soon and the complainant will get physical possession of the flat within a period of 03 years.  As per demand raised by OP complainant has paid Rs. 3,70,000/- to OP.  OP has not been able to give satisfactory reply to the complainant regarding progress of the project even when more than 3 ½ Years have elapsed.    Hence the complainant seeking direction to the OP to refund his deposit of      Rs. 3,70,000/-  (Rupees Three Lacs Seventy Thousand) with interest @ 12% per annum from date of payment till the date of refund, to pay compensation of Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupess Ten Lacs Only) for deficiency in service, to pay compensation of Rs. 2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lacs only)  for causing mental pain and harassment and Rs. 55,000/- (Rupees Fifty Five Thousand) towards litigation cost. 

2.     On receipt of notice OP appeared and contest claim vide its reply.

3.      We have perused the case file.  We have heard Shri Anoop Kumar Pandy counsel for complainant. Shri Manoj Kumar Mishra AR for OPs.

4.     AR for OP objected to jurisdiction of this Forum  to adjudicate the matter. 

5.        Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in Smt. Shivani Sharma and Shri Aditya Sharma Vs. M/s. TDI Infrastructure Ltd., vide its order dated 10 October 2017, observed that the complainant had sought refund of an amount of Rs. 26,10,256  (comprising of Rs.10,20,255/- (the amount paid by the complainants from their own funds) + Rs.15,90,001/-(loan amt, paid by the Bank to the OP ), Rs. 2,42,104/- paid by the complainant towards interest and  Rs. 10,000/- paid  towards loan processing charges with interest @ 12% per annum and  Rs. 20 Lacs for deficiency in service.   It was held that

‘’Compensation is in any case to be added to the value of good for determining pecuniary jurisdiction as contemplated in the Act. Interest cannot be ignored for the purpose, as apparently interest and compensation are the component of the same project. Infact as per the law settled both interest and compensation can, be granted, depending on the facts  of the case. In the event the deficiency of service is established, the sufferer in our view is entitled to both, interest for the delayed period and compensation for the harassment

and mental agony caused to him  due to alleged deficiency. Their Lordship in the matter of Bangalore Development Authority vs. Syndicate Bank - AIR 2007 SC 2198 - has held.

".........the complainant can be awarded the compensation in addition to the interest".

The Hon'ble NCDRC while disposing of the complaint case no.213/2012 on 14.03.2016 in the matter of Vijay Kumar Arya vs. M/s. TDI Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. passed following orders.

"In view of the above discussion the OP is directed to pay Rs.38,20,000/- alongwith interest @12% from the date of deposit by the complainant till the date of refund by the OP. The OP is further directed to pay Rs. One Lakh as compensation."

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and following the ratio  in the case of Ambrish Shukla (Supra) we find merit in the application filed by the opposite parties praying for dismissal of  the complaint on the ground  of pecuniary jurisdiction of this Commission and we order accordingly. ‘’

6.       In Shri Ravi Raj Chawla vs. Universal Buildwell Pvt. Ltd. Complaint No. 877/2017 vide its order dated 31/05/2017 Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission noted that Complainant had prayed for refund of  Rs. 58,27,886/- along with pendent lite and future interest @ 24% per annum compounded on the said sum till the date of actual realization of the payment. Hon’ble Delhi State Commission held that complaint was not maintainable as the Commission did not enjoy pecuniary jurisdiction.  It was observed that :

‘’Total amount, the amount claimed and the

Interest has to be computed for arriving at a

decision whether State Commission enjoys

pecuniary jurisdiction or not’’

7.     Now coming to the instant case admittedly the total consideration amount of the flat in question is Rs. 17,25,000/-.    Learned Counsel for complainant has filed calculation sheet.  As per the said calculation sheet complainant deposited  Rs. 2,00,000/-  with OP on 14/06/2012 and interest of  Rs. 1,42,948/- at the rate of 12% p.a. is calculated on this amount till 28/05/2018.  Complainant further deposited Rs.1,00,000/- with OP on 17/09/2012 and interest @ 12% is calculated up to 28/05/2018 is Rs. 68,351/-.   Complainant further deposited Rs. 70,000/- on 28/03/2013 and interest @ 12% calculated on the said amount till 28/05/2018 is Rs. 43,427/-.  Total interest

amount up to 28/05/2018 is stated to be Rs. 2,54,725/-.  Complainant has also claimed compensation of Rs. 10 Lacs for causing deficiency in service and     Rs. 2 Lacs for causing harassment.  If interest amount of Rs. 2,54,725/- and compensation claimed is added to total consideration amount of Rs. 17,25,000/- the same is beyond the pecuniary jurisdiction of this Forum.  As per Section 11 (i) of the Act the District Forum has pecuniary  jurisdiction to adjudicate claims where the value of goods and services and the compensation claimed does not exceed Rs. 20 Lacs.

8.       The complaint be accordingly returned to the complainant to be presented before the appropriate forum having jurisdiction. Copy of this order be sent to the parties as statutorily required.  File be consigned to record room.

          Announced on this 02^nd  Day of  August 2018.