Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

CC/248/2014

Meenakshi Ilangoo - Complainant(s)

Versus

Consim Info Pvt Ltd., - Opp.Party(s)

K.A.Vimal Kumar

23 Sep 2016

ORDER

   Date of Filing :   15.05.2014

                                                                      Date of Order :   23.09.2016

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI(SOUTH)

     2^nd Floor, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C.Nagar, Park Town, Chennai-3

 

PRESENT: THIRU. B. RAMALINGAM M.A.M.L.,                     : PRESIDENT

                 TMT. K.AMALA, M.A. L.L.B.,                                 : MEMBER I   

                           

C.C.NO.248/2014

FRIDAY THIS 23^RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2016

 

Mrs. Meenakshi Ilangoo,

W/o. S. Ilangoo,

Residing at

J/10, May Flower Garden,

Srinivasa Avenue Road,

R.A.Puram,

Chennai – 28.                                                          ..Complainant

 

                                         ..Vs..

 

Consim Info Pvt. Ltd.,

Rep. by it Managing Director,

(India Property Online Pvt. Ltd.,),

94, TVH Belliciaa Towers,

Tower II, 9^th Floor,

MRC Nagar,

Mandaveli,

Chennai 600 028.                                                      .. Opposite party   

 

For the Complainant         :   M/s.K.A.Vimal Kumar & other           

For the opposite party      :   appeared in person  

 

 

Complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986.  The complaint is filed seeking direction against the opposite party to refund the principal amount of Rs.3,000/- with interest and also to pay a sum of Rs.4,00,000/- towards compensation  and also to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- as cost of the complaint. 

ORDER

THIRU. B. RAMALINGAM PRESIDENT

1.The case of the complainant is briefly as follows:-  

 

The complainant submit that  the opposite party is a company doing the main object of enabling sales purchase and rental of property through an online media in connecting sellers and buyers for various properties.  The complainant in order to purchase a house flat in an around in the area of Mylapore or Mandaveli at the budget of Rs.50,00,000/- as approached the opposite party and have booked purchase order by paying Rs.3,000/-  for the arrangement of purchase of house flat at the desire budget of complainant in the locality prepared by her within 3 months from the date of purchase order.     Accordingly the opposite party have not arranged  any of the  house flat  for the purchase as promised by the opposite party despite of several demands made by the complainant.       Hence, the complainant also sent notice to the opposite party dated 25.02.2014.   Though the opposite party has received the same neither replied nor complied the demand.  As such the act of the opposite party amounts to deficiency in service which caused mental agony and hardship to the complainant.   As such the complainant has sought for refund of the principal amount of Rs.3,000/- with interest and also to pay a sum of Rs.4,00,000/- towards compensation  and also to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- as cost of the complaint.     Hence the complaint.  

 

Written Version of  opposite party is  in briefly as follows:

2.     The opposite party denies all the averments and allegation contained in the complaint except those that are specifically admitted herein.    The opposite party submit that in the present case the complainant was told time and again that for her specifications, there were only limited properties available and she was specifically asked to add further locations to widen the search options.   The assigned property search manager was in touch with  her on a regular basis recommending properties and also was arranging for site visits.  No interest was expressed by the complainant for the properties referred.    It is also important to note that the assigned Property Search Manager has clearly explained to the complainant that it was difficult to meet the requirements of her for the budget provided.  She has specifically agreed that she was aware of the market trend and accepted the fact that there were only limited properties available and also agreed to expand her search option.  All the allegations made by the complainant are completely false, baseless and malicious,  there was no refund process at all in the entire package.   The opposite party further submit that the facts clearly prove lot of time, effort and resources have been spent in attending to the requirements of the complainant, if the customer is not satisfied with any property shown within his choices, preference, budget limitations the company is not responsible for the same.   Therefore there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party and the complaint is liable to be dismissed.

3.   Complainant has filed her Proof affidavit and Ex.A1 to Ex.A6 were marked on the side of the complainant.   Proof affidavit of  opposite party filed and Ex.B1 to Ex.B4 documents were marked on  the side of the  opposite party. 

4.      The points that arise for consideration are as follows:-

1.   Whether the opposite party has committed  deficiency of

 service as alleged in the complaint?

 

2.   Whether the complainant is  entitled for the relief sought for

in the complaint?  If so to what extent ?

 

5.    POINTS 1 and 2 :

Perused the complaint filed by the complainant, written version filed by the opposite party and the proof affidavit filed by complainant  and opposite party, the documents Ex.A1 to Ex.A6 filed on the side of the complainant, Ex.B1 to Ex.B4 filed on the side of opposite party and considered the arguments of the both side counsel.

6.     There is no dispute that the opposite party is a company doing the main object of enabling sales purchase and rental of property through an online media in connecting sellers and buyers for various properties.  The complainant in order to purchase a house flat in an around in the area of Mylapore or Mandaveli at the budget of Rs.50,00,000/- has approached the opposite party and have booked purchase order by paying Rs.3,000/-  for the arrangement of purchase of house flat at the desire budget of complainant in the locality prepared by her within 3 months from the date of purchase order.  The copy of the cheque is marked as Ex.A1 for the payment of the said amount of Rs.3000/- by the complainant to the opposite party.  There is no dispute that the said cheque has been encashed by the opposite party as payment / charge towards the purchase order.

7.     The complainant has raised grievance in the complaint that the opposite party have not arranged / proposed any of the  house flat  for the purchase as promised by the opposite party despite of several demands made by the complainant, which amounts to deficiency of service on the part of opposite party hence, the complainant  has sent notice to the opposite party dated 25-02-2014 for the refund of the said  amount  of Rs.3,000/- and compensation of Rs.25,000/- whereas,  though the opposite party has received the same neither replied nor complied the demand, therefore complainant has filed this complaint against the opposite party, claiming the same.

8.     Whereas the opposite party has resisted the complaint by saying that as accepted the booking of the order made by the complainant, the opposite party has sincerely attempted to find out the  house flat in the area suggested by the complainant, whereas, no such house flat for the proposed purchase value of Rs.40,00,000/- to Rs.50,00,000/- of the complainant were available in that area and on intimating the same the opposite party also suggested other areas.    Accordingly a separate staff of the opposite party was entrusted to find out any  of such offers in other area  which  suits  to the proposal of the complainant, accordingly the said staff also attempted several calls  with different peoples for searching  of such  house flats in others areas.  Contrary to this the complainant allegations are not true and complaint is liable to be dismissed.

9.     However considering the nature of service accepted to be provided to the complainant by the opposite party is for arranging a house flat to the complainant for purchase.  The complainant has stated that despite of lapse of 9 months the opposite party have not proposed or referred any house flats for purchase as agreed by them.  But opposite party has resisted the complaint by filing written version that through their concerned staff, the work was entrusted and  they have tried in the complainant proposed areas where they could not found out any suitable house flats  for the budget and expectation of the complainant as such on suggestion made to the complainant they were also trying to find out a suitable house flats in other areas.  But if really such watchful attempts  have been made by the opposite parties they would have given the particulars of such flats, which they find out and referred to the complainant for his consideration, but no such particulars of the flat which were found out and proposed and referred to the complainant are even mentioned in the  written version or any other proof of document for the same has been filed on the side of  opposite party in the proceedings.  Therefore the opposite party’s contention as agreed, as per  purchase order of the complainant they have really found out some of the house flat and referred to the complainant  and also continuously trying for the same by approaching other parties are not acceptable. The mere contention of the opposite party that they have  been making calls to different people in search offer for sale of house flat even in other places cannot be acceptable without furnishing the necessary particulars of the persons or people, they approached in search offer for sale of flat.  If the opposite party would say that the availability of such kind of flat for the budget proposed  of the complainant is not possible in the proposed area of Mylapore and Mandaveli, the opposite party would have refused to accept such proposal of providing service to the complainant by stating the same, at the time of booking the purchase order itself.   The opposite party being the consultant in providing such service would have expected to aware / know such facts already.  But the opposite party has not done so.  Therefore, we are of the considered view that the opposite party, having accepted the booking of the purchase order from the complainant and having charged and received a sum of Rs.3000/- from the complainant as consideration for their proposed service, have not properly rendered the service of finding out and referring the particulars offer for house flat to the complainant which amounts to deficiency of service is acceptable.  Therefore considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the considered view, that the opposite party is liable to pay a sum of Rs.5000/- as just and reasonable compensation and to pay a sum of Rs.2000/- as cost to the complainant.  Accordingly the points 1 and 2 are answered.

 

In the result, this complaint is partly allowed.  The  opposite party is directed to pay a sum of Rs.5000/- (Rupees Five thousand only) as compensation and also to pay a sum of Rs,2000/- (Rupees Two thousand only) as cost within six weeks from the date of this order, failing which the said amount of Rs.5000/- will carry interest at the rate of 9% p. a. from the date of this order to till the date of payment.

Dictated to the Assistant transcribed and typed by her corrected and pronounced by us on this the  23^rd   day  of  September   2016.

 

MEMBER-I                                                                                                     PRESIDENT.

Complainant’s Side documents :

Ex.A1- 9.2.2013        - Copy of cheque paid as consideration in lien of Purchase order.

Ex.A2- 24.12.2013   - Copy of Telephonic conversations.

          30.12.2013 

 

Ex.A3- 25.2.2014      - Copy of Notice to opposite party by complainant.

 

Ex.A4-                    -        - Copy of Ack. Card.

 

Ex.A5- 18.3.2014      - Copy of Reply notice by opposite party.

 

Ex.A6- 10.5.2014      - Copy of rejoinder by complainant.

 

Opposite parties’ side documents: - 

 

Ex.B1- 9.2.2013      - Copy of Purchase order.

 

Ex.B2- 12.2.2013    - Copy of Invoice.

 

Ex.B3-          -       - Response case history.

 

Ex.B4-          -       - Copy of email correspondence.

 

 

 

MEMBER-I                                                                                                  PRESIDENT.