BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION AT BANGALORE (URBAN)

DATED 2^ND DAY OF JANUARY 2023

ORDER

SMT.M.SHOBHA, PRESIDENT

1. The complaint has been filed under Section 35 of C.P.Act (hereinafter referred as an Act) against the OP for the following reliefs against the OP:-

1. Direct the OP to refund the entire amount of Rs.10,25,000/- along with 18% interest per annum from the date of making payments till realization.
2. Direct the OP to pay the complainant Rs.50,000/- towards compensation for deficiency in service.
3. Direct the OP to pay compensation of Rs.50,000/- to the complainant towards shock, mental and physical suffering and loss of time due to the deficiency of service on the part of OP.
4. Grant such other reliefs deemed fit.

2. The case set up by the complainant in brief is as under:-

The OP is the company incorporated under the Registrar of Companies and Disha Choudary being the MD of the companies by name Dreamz Infra India Pvt. Ltd., and Sachin Naik being the founder Chairman of companies.  The OP representing the company gave advertisement in daily newspapers and television channel with attractive benefits to the members of the general public to approach the OP for allotment of site/plots in various parts of Bangalore city, such as Kanakapura Road, Mysore Road, Electronic City, Hebbal, HAL, Bellandur etc., by putting huge sign boards with RCB cricket players advertising the name of the company on the      t-shirts with company logo.  In the course of their representations and assurances the OP dishonestly induced the general public for allotment of either sites or plots in different locations of Bangalore city.  The OP deliberately and dishonestly perpetrated fraud by using forged documents as genuine and cheating the complainant and general public.

3.       It is the specific case of the complainant that the OP along with their staff represented the complainant that they have purchased land bearing Sy.No.130/3 measuring an extent of 1 acre 6 guntas situated at Doddabanenahalli village, Bidarahalli hobli, Bangalore east taluk and they are constructing an apartment on the said land.  The complainant booked plot 3 BHK measuring 1450 sq. feet in the proposed project known as Dreamz Swadhya.  The OP offered to sell the said flat to the complainant for a total consideration of Rs.20,50,000/- and the complainant has paid a sum of Rs.10,25,000/- on different dates.

4.       It is further case of the complainant that the complainant with a font hope that OP and staff will start the project and complete the same within a stipulated period and when the OP did not start the project the complainant started enquiring about the delay in starting the project.  The OP and her staff were postponing the same by giving one or the other reason and they did not start the project till date.  On the request and instruction of OP the complainant filled the cancellation and returned all the original documents to the OP.  

5.       It is further grievance of the complainant that time and again he approached the OP and all efforts went in vein, finally the OP is not available in the office at Koramangala and other branches all over Bangalore and have not refunded the advance amount.  The OP from the inception had no intention to develop the project and is involved in unfair trade practice and it is clear deficiency in the service offered by the OP.

6.   It is further case of the complainant that he approached the Jurisdiction Madivala Police Station and the police gave a printed format with filling the blanks to fill the complaint with an assurance that they would get back the money from the OP.  The complainant has also signed and lodged the complaint along with other investors. The Madivala police have registered the case in CR No.910/2016 for the offence punishable u/s 420 IPC against the OP and her staff, and now the investigation taken by the CID police, Karnataka State.

7.   The complainant being harassed mentally, physically and financially due to bad and deficient service of the OP at last has got issued a legal notice on 26.10.2019 calling upon the OP to refund the amount but the notice returned with an endorsement the addressee left. Hence the complainant has filed this complaint.

8.   Even though the complainant has taken the notice to the OP through paper publication the OP has not turned up and remained absent and placed exparte.

9.   The SPA holder of the complainant Sri.Ranjith Sharma has filed his affidavit evidence and relies on 05 documents. 

10. Heard the arguments of advocate for the complainant.  Perused the documents.

11. The following points arise for our consideration as are:-

1. Whether the complainant proves deficiency of service on the part of OP?
2. Whether the complainant is entitled to relief mentioned in the complaint?
3. What order?

12. Our answers to the above points are as under:

       Point No.1:  Affirmative

      Point No.2: Affirmative in part

      Point No.3: As per final orders

REASONS

13.        Point No.1 AND 2: The complaint and the evidence and the documents produced by the complainant remained unchallenged.  Hence there is no reason to disbelieve the evidence and documents submitted by the complainant.  

14.        It is clear from the evidence and the documents that the complainant impressed by the advertisement given by the OP company has booked a 3 BHK flat measuring 1450 sq feet in the proposed project known as Dreemz Swadhya and paid an advance sale consideration of Rs.10,25,000/- and entered into a Memorandum of Understanding with the OP.  After enquiry about the delay in starting the project the complainant came to know that the OP and her staff were postponing the same by giving one or the other reason and they have not started the project till date.  

15.        It is further case of the complainant that as per the request and instruction of the OP he has filed cancellation form and returned all the original documents to the OP on their assurance that they will return the advance amount received from the complainant along with interest within one month.  After that the OP and her staff closed their office and they are not available in any area of Bangalore.  After that he has lodged complaint before Madivala police and they have registered a complaint in CR No.910/2016 for the offence punishable u/s 420 IPC against the OP and her staff and now the investigation is taken by the CID Police.  The legal notice issued by the complainant returned unserved with an endorsement addressee left.  

16.        The failure on the part of the OP to form the sites in the layout has agreed and to execute the sale deed and deliver the site non refund of the amount paid by the complainant as assured by the OP is a clear deficiency of service.  

17.        In support of his contention the SPA holder of the complainant was examined as PW1 and he has filed his affidavit evidence reiterated all the allegations made in the complaint. He has produced the SPA as Ex.P.1 and copy of the memorandum of understanding as Ex.P2 and copy of legal notice Ex.P.3 and Ex.P4 and P5 are unserved postal covers.

18.        Even though the complainant has paid an advance amount of Rs.10,25,000/- on the date of entering into the Memorandum of Understanding out of the sale consideration of Rs.20,50,000/- the OP has played fraud on the complainant and not yet started the project. The OP has also given false assurance to the complainant stating that she will return the advance amount if the complainant  filled the cancellation letter and return all the original documents.  The complainant has given the cancellation letter with all original documents to the OP.  After collecting all the original documents with cancellation letter the OP closed their office and left Bangalore.  Inspite of lodging complaint before the Madivala Police, the OP has neither returned the amount nor formed any layout as per their proposal and thereby committed deficiency of service, unfair trade practice.  Therefore the complainant is entitle for the relief claimed in this complaint. Hence we answer point No.1 in affirmative and 2 partly in affirmative.

19.        Point No.3:- In view the discussion referred above we proceed to pass the following;

O R D E R

1. The complaint is allowed in part.
2. OP is directed to refund the entire amount of Rs.10,25,000/- with interest at 12% p.a., from the date of complaint till realization.
3. OP is further directed to pay compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- and Rs10,000/- towards litigation expenses to the complainant.
4. The OP shall comply this order within 60 days from this date, failing which the OP shall pay interest at 14% p.a. after expiry of 60 days on Rs.10,25,000/- till final payment.
5. Furnish the copy of this order and return the extra pleadings and documents to the parties.

(Dictated to the Stenographer, got it transcribed and corrected, pronounced in the Open Commission on this 2^ND day of JANUARY, 2023)

Documents produced by the Complainant-P.W.1 are as follows:

Documents produced by the representative of opposite party – R.W.1;

NIL