Kerala

StateCommission

CC/16/27

P UMMERBINAF - Complainant(s)

Versus

DLF SOUTHERN TOWNS PVT LTD - Opp.Party(s)

T J LAKSHMANAN

30 Sep 2016

ORDER

 

 

KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL

COMMISSION  VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

CC.No. 27/16

 

JUDGMENT DATED: 30.09.2016

 

PRESENT : 

JUSTICE SHRI. P.Q. BARKATHALI                         :  PRESIDENT

SHRI.V.V. JOSE                                                          : MEMBER

 

1. P. Ummer Binaf,,

Palakkal House, Kattoor P.O,

Thrissur District.

Working as:

Lead Project Engineer,

On Shore Engineering, Qatar Petroleum,

P.O.Box-47, Doha, Qatar, R/by his

Power of Attorney Holder-

K.K. Muhammed Ali, S/o Kunjumon,

Karukathara House, Kattoor P.O,

Thrissur District.

                                                                                                : COMPLAINANTS

2. Nimmi Aboo, W/o P. Ummer Binaf,

Valiyakath House, Mathilakam P.O,

Thrissur District, R/by her

Power of Attorney Holder-

K.K. Muhammed Ali, S/o Kunjumon,

Karukathara House, Kattoor P.O,

Thrissur District.

 

(By Adv: Sri. Santharam P)

 

            Vs.

 

 

 

 

DLF Southern Towns Pvt. Ltd.,

Opp. Doordarsan Kendra,

Kakkanad, Ernakulam District,PIN – 682 030.            : OPPOSITE PARTY

Having Zonal Office at PDR Bhavan,

Palliyil Lane, Forwshore Road, Kochi-16,

Rep. by its Authorised Signatory M.G.Gireesh.

 

(By Adv: Sri. V.K. Mohan Kumar)

 

JUDGMENT

JUSTICE SHRI. P.Q. BARKATHALI:  PRESIDENT

This is a complaint filed by the complainants under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act seeking a direction directing the opposite party to complete the construction of the flat booked by them and also pay interest at the rate of 12% per annum on the total amount paid by the complainants Rs.44,95,220/- from February 2013 to the date of delivery  of the flat.  They also claimed refund of the excess amount of tax paid by them Rs.1,85,500/- and a compensation of Rs.13,08,160/- and a cost of Rs.25,000/-.

2.      The case of the complainants as detailed in the complaint in brief is this:-

Complainants are husband and wife.  First complainant is employed in Qatar.  Complainants booked a Flat No. 837 in Tower No. P on 8^th floor of the apartment complex of the opposite parties in New Town Heights at Kakkanadu.  An agreement was executed between the first complainant and the opposite party regarding the construction and handing over of the flat.  The total sale consideration was Rs.44,22,955.20.  Complainants paid the entire amount.  In addition to that amount Rs.1,93,938/- was paid by the complainants to the opposite party towards tax and Rs.5546/- as interest for the delayed payment of tax.  The agreed date of completion of the construction was on February 2013.  Opposite party has not so far completed the construction and handed over the flat to the complainant.  Therefore complainants prayed for a direction directing the opposite party to complete the construction of the flat and hand over the same to the complainant.  They also claimed interest at the rate of 12% per annum from February 2013 onwards.  An amount of Rs.1,85,500/- was also sought to be refunded to him.  Rs.13,08,160/- is claimed as compensation.

3.      Opposite party is M/s DLF Southern Towns Private Limited, Kakkanadu, Cochin. He in his version contended that the reason for delay in completing the construction was beyond the control of the opposite party that there was shortage of building materials and that opposite party is prepared to complete the construction and hand over the same to the complainants as soon as possible.

4.      Complainant filed proof affidavit and produced Exts.A1 to A7.  There was no evidence adduced by the opposite party.

5.      Heard both the counsels.

6.      The following points arise for consideration:-

1. Whether there was any deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party?
2. What are the reliefs complainants are entitled to do?

7.      The case of the complainants is that they booked a flat in the project of the opposite party and paid the entire sale consideration but the opposite party has not so far completed the construction or delivered the flat to the complainants.  They sought a direction directing the opposite party to complete the construction of the flat and hand over the same to the complainants and also claimed interest at the rate of 12% per annum from February 2013 onwards for the entire amount paid by them.  They have also claimed refund of Rs.1,85,500/- which opposite party has collected as tax.  Complainants have also claimed a compensation of Rs.13,08,160/- and a cost of Rs.25,000/-.

8.      It is the admitted case that agreed date of delivery was February 2013.  The fact that the delay in the construction of the flat was due to reasons beyond the control of the opposite party is not proved.  Thus there is clear deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party.

9.      As we have found that there is deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties we allow the complaint.  Opposite parties are directed to complete the construction of the flat and hand over the same to the complainant within 6 months from this date.  Complainants are entitled to interest at the rate of 12% per annum on the total amount paid by them, Rs.44,95,220/- from February 2013 till the completion and handing over the flat to the complainants.  Complainants are entitled to a cost of Rs.20,000/- in this complaint.  As interest is awarded at 12% per annum no separate compensation is awarded.

In the result appeal is allowed in part.  Opposite party is directed to complete the construction of the flat and hand over the same to the complainants within six months from this date.  Opposite parties are also directed to pay interest at the rate of 12% per annum from February 2013 onwards on the total amount paid by the complainant Rs.44,95,220/- till the

delivery of the flat.  Complainants are entitled to a cost of Rs.20,000/- in this complaint.

 

JUSTICE P.Q. BARKATHALI:  PRESIDENT

 

 

V.V. JOSE : MEMBER

 

APPENDIX

COMPLAINANTS WITNESS

Nil

COMPLAINANTS EXHIBITS

Ext.A1        : True copy of Power of Attorney dated:14.08.2014.

Ext.A2        : True copy of Ext.A1 along with the complaint.

Ext.A3        : True copy of letter dtd:16.8.2010 issued by the opposite party evidencing receipt  of Rs.4,10,320/- from the complainants.

Ext.A4        : True copy of the receipt dtd:4.9.2010 issued by the opposite party evidencing receipt of Rs.38,88,116/- from the complainants.

Ext.A5        : True copy of the receipt dtd:1.8.2012 issued by the opposite party evidencing receipt of Rs.22,472/- from the complainants.

Ext.A6        : True copy of receipt dtd:27.12.2012 issued by the opposite party an amount of Rs.1,83,938/- towards service tax.

Ext.A7        : True copy of the lawyer notice dtd:22.8.2014 issued to the opposite party by registered post.

 

OPPOSITE PARTIES WITNESS

Nil

OPPOSITE PARTIES EXHIBITS

Nil

 

JUSTICE P.Q. BARKATHALI:  PRESIDENT

 

 

V.V. JOSE : MEMBER

 

VL