DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM (CENTRAL)
ISBT KASHMERE GATE DELHI
CC/260/2018
No. DF/ Central/ Date
Mr. Manoj Chopra
H. No. 269, Sector-7 A
1st Floor, Faridabad, Haryana-121006 …..COMPLAINANT
VERSUS
Earth Iconic Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd.
26, 1st Floor, Pusa Road, Karol Bagh,
New Delhi-110005 …..OPPOSITE PARTY
Quorum: Ms Rekha Rani, President
Ms. Manju Bala Sharma, Member
Mr. R.S.Nagar, Member
ORDER
Ms Rekha Rani, President
Sh. Manoj Chopra (in short the complainant) filed an instant complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 as amended pleading therein that complainant booked a flat measuring 520 sq. ft. in the project of the OP known as Earth Titanium situated at Plot No. TZ-06, Tech Zone Noida, Gautam Budh Nagar, Uttar Pradesh. The total cost of the flat was Rs. 19,50,000/-. It is further stated that complainant came to know that the booked flat has already been sold by the OPs to a third party and that an FIR by Economic Offence Wing, Delhi has also been lodged against the promoters and directors of the OP. Complainant has sought a refund of his deposit of Rs. 4,80,130/- with interest @18% per annum and Rs.35,000/- towards the cost of litigation.
In Shivani Sharma Vs. TDI M/s. TDI Infrastructure Ltd., Complaint Case No. 464/2016 vide order dated 24/10/2017 our State Commission observed that compensation and interest have to be added to decide about pecuniary jurisdiction. It held:
‘’Compensation is, in any case, to be added to the value of goods 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. In fact 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, a 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/- along with 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.1,00,000/- as compensation.”
As per the complainant himself, the total cost of the flat is Rs.19,50,000/-. Complainant has submitted that he has paid an amount of Rs.2,78,438/- vide cheque no. 428103 to the OP. He has not made clear as to when an amount of Rs. 1,85,625/- was paid to the OP. He has annexed a copy of cheque of Rs.2,78,438/- in favour of OP dated 01.09.2013. Although complainant has claimed interest at the rate of 18% per annum yet even if interest @ 9% only on the amount of Rs.2,78,438/- from 01.09.2013 up to date is considered, the interest on this amount alone comes to Rs.1,25,297/- leaving aside interest on Rs.1,85,625/- and Rs.16,067/-, the date of deposit whereof is not mentioned in the complaint. This is without adding litigation cost of Rs.35,000/-. The same is beyond the pecuniary jurisdiction of this Forum.
The instant complaint is accordingly returned to the complainant to be presented before the appropriate forum having jurisdiction. Copy of the same is retained on record. Copy of this order is sent to the parties as statutorily required. File be consigned to record room.
Announced on Day of 2018.
