Punjab

Jalandhar

CC/133/2017

Sain Dass S/o Sh Munshi Ram - Complainant(s)

Versus

Emerging India Infra and Developers Limited - Opp.Party(s)

Sh Ravinder Manuja

16 Jan 2018

ORDER

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum
Ladowali Road, District Administrative Complex,
2nd Floor, Room No - 217
JALANDHAR
(PUNJAB)
 
Complaint Case No. CC/133/2017
 
1. Sain Dass S/o Sh Munshi Ram
House No.44,New Raja Garden,Mithapur Road
Jalandhar
Punjab
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. Emerging India Infra and Developers Limited
through its Manager, Arora Prime Tower,6th Floor,601,Near Bus Stand,
Jalandhar 144001
Punjab
2. Emerging India Infra and Developers Limited
through its Managing Director,SCO 46-47,Sector 9-D,Near Matka Chowk,Madhya Marg,Chandigarh-160009.
3. S Gurpreet Singh Sidhu.Director of Emerging India Infra and Developers Limited
through its Managing Director,SCO 46-47,Sector 9-D,Near Matka Chowk,Madhya Marg,Chandigarh-160009.
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
  Karnail Singh PRESIDENT
  Harvimal Dogra MEMBER
 
For the Complainant:
Sh. Ravinder Manuja, Adv and Sh. Shiv Kumar Sonik, Adv Counsels for the Complainant.
 
For the Opp. Party:
OP No.1 to 3 exparte.
 
Dated : 16 Jan 2018
Final Order / Judgement

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES

REDRESSAL FORUM, JALANDHAR.

Complaint No.133 of 2017

Date of Instt. 05.05.2017

Date of Decision:16.01.2018

Sain Dass age about 65 years Approx. Son of Sh. Munshi Ram resident of House No.44, New Raja Garden, Mithapur Road, Jalandhar City.

..........Complainant Versus

 

1. Emerging India Infra and Developers Limited, through its Manager, Arora Prime Tower, 6th Floor, 601, Near Bus Stand, Jalandhar, Punjab, 144001.

2. Emerging India Infra and Developers Limited, through its Managing Director, SCO-46-47, Sector 9-D, Near Matka Chowk, Madhya Marg, Chandigarh-160009.

3. S. Gurpreet Singh Sidhu, Director of Emerging India Infra and Developers Limited, through its Managing Director, SCO-46- 47, Sector 9-D, Near Matka Chowk, Madhya Marg, Chandigarh-160009.

..….…Opposite parties Complaint Under the Consumer Protection Act.

 

Before: Sh. Karnail Singh (President)

Smt. Harvimal Dogra (Member)

 

Present: Sh. Ravinder Manuja, Adv and Sh. Shiv Kumar Sonik, Adv Counsels for the Complainant.

 

OP No.1 to 3 exparte.

Order

Karnail Singh (President)

1. This complaint presented by the complainant, wherein alleged that the OP No.1 is the branch office of the OP No.2 and the OP No.3 is the director of the OP No.2. The OP is primarily engaged in the business of real estate and road construction and is a limited company registered under the Companies Act, 1956 and the corporate identity number of the company is U70101RJ2010PLC033717, which has been issued by the Ministry of Corporate Affairs Govt. of India, as such, company cannot be liquidated unless and until all the liability of the OPs are fully cleared.

2. That there are several plans of the OPs, which caters to the needs of all types of customers viz Farmers, Retired Persons, Salaried Class etc. The OPs invest the amount received from the customers in the real estate sector and civil and road construction works, which ultimately as per their leaflet gives good yield and growth over a period of time assuring safety of the investment at the same time. The OPs started marketing/booking of plots through their authorized representatives and opened their one office at Arora Prime Tower, 601, 6th Floor, Near Bus Stand, Jalandhar. The OPs approached the complainant through their authorized representative for booking of plots and perused the complainant at Jalandhar to book a share in the project, as such, the complainant is a consumer in the eyes of law.

3. That complainant on persuasion of the OPs made an application for the booking of plot, in the shape of share, and the OP in response to the application of the complainant were pleased to inform the complainant that complainant name has been registered for the plots booked by him and furnished the following details with the stipulation that the terms of booking and allotment are governed by the terms printed overleaf on the Registration Letter/Form.

Name of the Customer

Sain Dass

Father's Name

Munshi Ram

Customer's Age

61 Years

Date of Birth

22-05-1952

Address of the Customer

House No.44, New Raja Garden, Mithapur Road, Jalandhar

Sr. No.

34533

Branch Code

22

Advisor Code

8572

Issued on

16-11-2013

Customer ID

21808

Registration No.

SP0022000030

Date of Registration

15-11-2013

 

Name of the Plan and Term

SP Three Years Plan

Consideration Value and Plot Size Sq. Fts.

Rs.1,00,000/- for 2000 Sq. Fts.

Mode of Payment

Demand Draft

Periodicity of Installments

N.A.

Maturity Date of Agreement

14-11-2013

First Receipt Number and Date

21808 Dated 16-11-2013

Estimated realizable value at the end of the year

Rs.1,44,290/-

Nominee's Name

Smt. Chameli Devi

Relationship

Wife

Age of Nominee

57 Years

 

4. The complainant, who is a retired person, who opted for single payment plan for a locking period of three years beginning from 15.11.2013 and the OPs issued receipt bearing No.34533 dated 16.11.2013 for an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- paid vide demand draft, for further references. The deal was struck at Arora Prime Tower, Near Bus Stand, Jalandhar, Punjab, India at the local office of the OP No.2 and 3. The maturity date for the deal was fixed 14.11.2016. At the time of registration, the complainant was informed that OPs enjoy very good reputation in the business of real estate and they are also obeying the rules and regulations of Securities and Exchange Board of India and Reserve Bank of India as are applicable. As per terms and conditions, the complainant is entitled to the maturity value of the amount of Rs.1,44,290/-, which is due from 14.11.2016. The original copy of the registration letter containing the terms and conditions alongwith the request letter dated 14.11.2016 for making the necessary payment has already been submitted to the office of the OPs and bank detail also has been furnished with cancelled blank cheque. Despite that the OP failed to make the payment of maturity amount as per stipulation. The complainant has approached the OPs many times through telephonically as well as whatapps messages and finally the complainant also served a legal notice dated 09.03.2017, but all in vain and as such, there is a deficiency in service, negligence and unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs, which give arise to file the present complaint with the prayer that the complaint of the complainant may be accepted and OPs be directed to make the payment of maturity amount of Rs.1,44,290/-, which was due on 14.11.2016 alongwith interest @ 24% per annum alongwith damages and litigation expenses for causing harassment, mental tension and inconvenience.

5. Notice of the complaint was given to the OPs, but despite service all the OPs failed to appear and ultimately all the OPs were proceeded against exparte.

6. In order to prove the exparte claim, the complainant himself tendered into evidence his duly sworn affidavit Ex.CA alongwith some documents Ex.C-1 Brochure-cum-Terms and Conditions, Ex.C-2 Application dated 14.11.2016 submitted by the complainant to the OP, Ex.C-3 Registration Letter, Ex.C-4 Details of E-mails, Ex.C-5 Request Letter dated 23.01.2017 for payment of maturity bonds, Ex.C-6 Legal Notice dated 09.03.2017, Ex.C-7 and Ex.C-8 Postal Receipts and then closed the evidence.

7. We have heard the learned counsel for the complainant and also gone through the case file very minutely.

8. Precisely, the case set up by the complainant is only that the OP No.2 and 3 alluring the public to invest their money for getting a good interest and accordingly, the complainant invested a money of Rs.1,00,000/- with OP No.2 and 3 through OP No.1 and accordingly, the OP issued the brochure Ex.C-1, showing the procedure of the plan, the said investment of the complainant was known as a Single Payment Plan, which is for three years and as per the terms and conditions as enumerated on the back side of the photostat copy of registration letter Ex.C-3, the said amount is to be paid to the complainant on maturity i.e. 14.11.2016, a sum of Rs.1,44,290/-, but despite repeated orally request as well as through whatsup and by way of written request, the OP failed to make the payment and even the complainant submitted an application alongwith the original certificate for making a payment, whereby the particulars of the bank account of the complainant also furnished and copy of the said request letter is Ex.C-2, despite that the OP failed to make the payment.

9. We find that the evidence of the complainant is un- rebutted and un-challenged, being a reason the OPs despite service did not bother to appear for giving a reply to the said allegations as made in the complaint, so, if the evidence of the complainant is un-rebutted and un-challenged, then we have no earthly ground to discard the exparte evidence of the complainant, so, accordingly, by accepting the said evidence of the complainant, it is clearly established on the file that the complainant has invested a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-, for a Single Payment Plan as elaborated in the brochure Ex.C-1, but despite written request, the said maturity amount has not been paid to the complainant and as such, we are of the considered opinion that the complainant is able to prove its case, therefore, we find the complainant is entitled for the relief claimed and accordingly, the complaint of the complainant is partly accepted and all the OPs are directed to pay the maturity amount of Rs.1,44,290/- alongwith interest @ 9% per annum from the date of maturity i.e. 14.11.2016, till realization alongwith compensation for harassment, mental tension and inconvenience to the complainant, to the tune of Rs.10,000/- and litigation expenses of Rs.3000/-. The entire compliance be made within one month from the date of receipt of the copy of order. The complaint could not be decided within stipulated time frame due to rush of work.

10. Copies of the order be supplied to the parties free of cost, as per Rules. File be indexed and consigned to the record room.

 

Dated Harvimal Dogra Karnail Singh

16.01.2018 Member President

 
 
[ Karnail Singh]
PRESIDENT
 
[ Harvimal Dogra]
MEMBER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.