DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM (CENTRAL)

                                        ISBT KASHMERE GATE DELHI

CC/ 109/2017

No. DF/ Central/

MANISH KUMAR

S/o Shri Bijendra Kumar

R/o 94, Kalyan Nagar,

Garh Road,

Meerut UP.
                                                                                      ……..COMPLAINANT          

 VERSUS

1. M/s Earth Iconic Infrastructures Pvt Ltd

Through its directors

Regd office :

26, Ist Floor, Pusa Road,

Adjacent to Karol  Bagh Metro Station

New Delhi-110005

Also at:

Corporate Office: A1, C & D, Sector -16,

Near Metro Station , Noida-201301 (UP)

2. Sh. Atul Gupta Director

M/s Earth Iconic Infrastructure Pvt Ltd

R/o A-1, 294, Janakpuri, Near Gold Gym, New Delhi-110058

                                                                                              …..OPPOSITE PARTIES

                                                              ORDER                                       

Rekha Rani, President

1. Mr Manish Kumar (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) alleging  therein he   had  booked  a studio apartment   in the project called “Earth Titanium

(Titanium Studios)” situated at TZ-06, Tech Zone, Greater Noida, U.P of (in short the OP) measuring 300 sq. fts and had paid a sum of Rs. 1,85,328/-in respect of his booking/ CSN ETTS -0659. The complainant paid a total sum of Rs. 4,63,328/- in respect of said flat.OP allured complainant to book a flat measuring 300 sq.ft. in their another project i.e. “Earth Techone” and assured to adjust the amount of Rs. 4,63,328/- in the said project.He was required to pay a further amount of Rs. 1,55,000/- which complainant was constrained to pay to the OP vide cheque no. 678551 dated 19/09/2015.As such complainant has paid total sum of Rs. 6,18,328/- to the OP.More than one and a half year has elapsed but OP has neither handed over physical possession of previously allotted flat nor allotted any other flat in their another project to the complainant. Hence the complaint seeking direction to the OP to refund a sum of Rs. 6,18,328/- along with interest @ 24% p.a. w.e.f. 19.09.2015 and Rs. 2 lacs as compensation.

2.  On receipt of notice of the instant complaint OP appeared and contested  the claim vide its written statement
3. We have perused the case file.  We have heard Sh. Chittaranjan Hati  Ld. Counsel for complainant.  None appeared for OP to address arguments.
4. On 27.03.2018 learned counsel for complainant made a statement that the complainant had paid Rs. 1,85,328/- to the OP towards booking of the flat  which is 10% of the total amount i.e. Rs. 1,85,3280/-.
5. Complainant has prayed for Rs. 2,00,000/- as compensation.  He has also prayed for refund of an amount of Rs. 6,18,328/- with interest @ 24% p.a. w.e.f. 19/09/2015 till realisation.
6. 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/-

‘’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.”

7. In view of the above quoted judgement if interest @ 12% is calculated on the claimed amount i.e. 618328/- w.e.f. 19/09/15 even till date and claimed compensation amount is added to Rs. 1853280/- the same is beyond the pecuniary jurisdiction of this Forum.

8. 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.

9.  Since this forum lacks pecuniary jurisdiction to adjudicate the claim,  the  instant complaint be accordingly returned to the complainant to be presented before the appropriate forum having jurisdiction. Copy of the  same  be retained  on record. Copy of this order be sent to the parties as statutorily required. File be consigned to record room.

          Announced on this  01^st  Day  of  June  2018.