ORAL
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,
UTTAR PRADESH, LUCKNOW
COMPLAINT NO. 03 OF 2022
Smt. Reena Titiksha
W/o Ratnesh Kumar Pathak
R/o 3/384, Vishal Khand
Gomti Nagar, Lucknow.
...Complainant
Vs.
- Gangotri Constructions
001, Ground Floor
Allaya Galaxy Apartment
66-B, Butlerganj
Prag Narain Road, Lucknow.
Through its Managing Partner
- Mr. Rehan Mohammad, Partner
Gangotri Constructions
S/o Mr. Aan Mohammad
R/o Dhaam Mohalla, Near Masjid,
Panna, Madhya Pradesh
- Smt. Kashifa Hashmi, Partner
Gangotri Constructions
D/o Syed Fida Husan
R/o Mohalla-Khaipur, Zila-Banda
- Mr. Aizajuddeen, Partner
Gangotri Constructions
S/o Mr. Sirajuddin
R/o Mohalla Khaipur, Zila Banda
- Shahnawaz Khan, Partnr
Gangotri Constructions
S/o Mr Nasir Khan
R/o Near Madina Masjid
Chatarpur Road, Matipura, Mahoba
- Mohd. Asif Siddiqui, Partner
Gangotri Constructions
S/o Haji Abdul Gani
Mohalla Raniganj
Zila Panna, Madhya Pradesh
...Opposite Parties
BEFORE:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR, PRESIDENT
:2:
For the Complainant : None appeared.
For the Opposite Party : None appeared.
Dated : 21-08-2023
JUDGMENT
MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR, PRESIDENT
The instant complaint has been filed by the complainant under Section 47(i) & (ii) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 with the following prayer:-
“Wherefore it is most graciously be prayed:-
- That this Hon’ble Forum may kindly be gracious to direct the opposite parties to finish the Flat and building and to deliver physical possession of Flat No. 305-E, Third Floor, Allayah Lake View Apartment situated at Vikalp Khand-3, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow after getting the Completion Certificate from LDA and further pay interest at the rate of 18% on the deposited money of Rs.38,00,000/- till the date of actual physical possession of said Flat.
- That this Hon’ble Commission may kindly be pleased to order the opposite parties to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs.20,00,000/- as compensation on account of mental tension and agony as inflicted by the negligent act of opposite parties.
- That this Hon’ble Forum may kindly be pleased to direct the opposite parties to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs.20,000/- per month on account of rent from the date of execution of sale deed i.e. 31-07-2021 till the date of actual delivery of physical possession. No other complaint is filed any other court.
- That this Hon’ble Commission may kindly be pleased to direct the opposite parties to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- on account of cost of suit and other miscellaneous expenses.
-
- That any other relief deemed fit and appropriate under the facts and circumstances of the case may also be awarded to the complainant against the opposite parties.
From the bare perusal of the contents mentioned in the complaint and the documents available on record this fact is brought to the notice of this Court that the complainant has booked a Flat with the opposite party No. 01 M/s Gangotri Constructions, 001, Ground Floor, Allaya Galaxy Apartment, 66-B, Butlerganj, Prag Narain Road, Lucknow of which opposite party Nos. 02, 03, 04, 05 and 06 are the partners/promoters.
The cost of the Flat was Rs.38,00,000/-. The complainant has paid the total cost of the flat i.e. Rs.38,00,000/- to the opposite party. The said Unit/Flat No. E-305, which was allotted by the opposite parties to the complainant was supposed to be completed and handed over to the complainant by the opposite parties within three months from the date of the registered sale deed executed. The registered sale deed has been executed in favour of the complainant on 31-07-2021, therefore, it is claimed by the complainant that possession of the aforesaid unit was to be handed over to the complainant on or before 31-10-2021 whereas, the same is not yet handed over to the complainant by the opposite parties.
The complainant on several occasions met with the partners of the opposite parties and requested them to complete the building as well as flat in question so that the complainant can start residing in the allotted flat. At present the building is lying incomplete and lacks of electricity, lift, sewerage system, completion certificate, occupation certificate, water tanks, plaster, paining etc. Now the opposite parties are pressing upon the complainant as well as other allottees of flats to get the building/Flats completed out of their own funds as they are running short of money. Besides this the opposite parties are also pressing upon allottes to liaison with
:4:
Development Authority for securing completion certificate whereas at the time of execution of sale deed of said flat.
The opposite parties apprised that they have duly sanctioned map from Development Authority and soon possession shall be handed over to the allottees after obtaining completion certificate from LDA. The opposite parties collected huge money from the allottees on fake promises and the money thus collected had lavishly been spent by partners of opposite parties on their luxuries and other projects thereby leaving the allottees in a lurch. The opposite parties are pressing the complainant and other allottes to pay more money if the allottees want completion of building at the earliest.
Admittedly the instant complaint has been entertained and the notices were issued to the opposite parties by this Court vide order dated 21-01-2022 which is quoted hereinbelow:-
“21-01-2022
Sri Mujeeb Effendi, learned Counsel for the complainant appeared.
Heard learned Counsel for the complainant.
Learned Counsel for the complainant has submitted that the complainant has booked a Flat with the opposite party No. 01 M/s Gantotri Constructions, 001, Ground Floor, Allaya Galaxy Apartment, 66-B, Butlerganj, Prag Narain Road, Lucknow of which opposite party Nos. 02, 03, 04, 05 and 06 are the partners/promoters. The said Unit/Flat No. E-305, which was allotted by the opposite parties to the complainant was supposed to be completed and handed over to the complainant by the opposite parties within three months from the date of the registered sale deed executed. The registered sale deed has been executed in favour of the complainant on 31-07-2021, therefore, it is claimed by the complainant that possession of the aforesaid unit was to be handed over to the complainant on or before 31-10-2021 whereas, the same is not yet handed over to the complainant by the opposite parties.
The matter requires consideration.
:5:
Issue notice to the opposite parties. The office is directed to send the notices to all the opposite parties through registered post within two weeks.
The opposite parties are directed to file their reply by means of an affidavit and to explain as to why they have not fulfilled their obligation/assurance by handing over the registered Flat to the complainant so far.
List this complaint within first 20 cases on 10-03-2022 alongwith Complaint No. 37/2021.”
Admittedly the allotted flat being Flat No. E-305 has not been handed over to the complainant till filing of the instant complaint, hence the present complaint has been filed before this Court which is pending before this Court and on several dates the matter has been listed and orders are regularly passed.
Before deciding the complaint it is necessary to furnish the details of various orders passed by this Court on different dates.
On 10-05-2022 the following order has been passed by this Court:-
“दिनांक- 10.05.2022
वाद पुकारा गया। विपक्षीगण की ओर से विद्वान अधिवक्ता श्री पीयूषमणि त्रिपाठी एवं श्री गौरव प्रकाश सक्सेना उपस्थित हुए और कथन किया कि वे अपना वकालतनामा तीन कार्यदिवस में कार्यालय में प्रस्तुत करेंगे। विद्वान अधिवक्तागण द्वारा कथन किया गया कि परिवादी एवं कम्पनी के मध्य प्रस्तुत परिवाद से संबंधित विवाद को समझौते के आधार पर शीघ्र ही निस्तारित किया जा सकता है। अत: प्रस्तुत वाद को दो सप्ताह हेतु स्थगित किया जाता है।
प्रस्तुत वाद को सुनवाई हेतु दिनांक- 27-05-2022 को सूचीबद्ध किया जावे।“
Further on 10-11-2022 the following order has been passed:-
“दिनांक :10-11-2022
वाद पुकारा गया।
:6:
परिवादिनी स्वयं उपस्थित। विपक्षी की ओर से विद्धान अधिवक्ता श्री पियूष मणि त्रिपाठी उपस्थित। विपक्षीगण संख्या-2, 3 ,4, 5 व 6 के विरूद्ध नोटिस द्वारा निबन्धक, राज्य आयोग द्वारा जिलाधिकारी, लखनऊ एवं पुलिस आयुक्त, लखनऊ दो सप्ताह की अवधि में जारी की जावे तथा विपक्षीगण संख्या-2, 3, 4, 5 व 6 की उपस्थिति इस न्यायालय के सम्मुख प्रस्तुत परिवाद में अपना पक्ष प्रस्तुत किये जाने हेतु सुनिश्चित की जावे क्योंकि विपक्षीगण द्वारा पूर्व में कुछ अधिवक्तागण के माध्यम से मौखिक रूप से वाद स्थगित कराये जाते रहे तथा अधिवक्तागण को आस्वस्त किया जाता रहा कि वे संबंधित वकालतनामा एवं पक्ष प्रस्तुत किये जाने हेतु आवश्यक कार्यवाही यथाशीघ्र करेंगे, परन्तु लगभग 10 माह की अवधि व्यतीत होने के उपरान्त भी उपरोक्त कार्यवाही सुनिश्चित नहीं की जा सकी है जब कि पंजीकृत डाक से नोटिस विपक्षीगण को प्रेषित की गयी है जिसकी आख्या भी कार्यालय द्वारा उल्लिखित की गयी है।
प्रस्तुत वाद को पुन: सुनवाई हेतु संबंधित परिवाद संख्या-37/2021 के साथ दिनांक 22-12-2022 को प्रथम 10 वादों की सूची में सूचीबद्ध किया जावे।“
On 22-12-2022 again this Court has passed the following order.
“22-12-2022
पुकार की गई। विपक्षी की ओर से विद्वान अधिवक्ता श्री पियूष मणि त्रिपाठी उपस्थित है, लेकिन उनके द्वारा कथन किया गया कि विपक्षीगण द्वारा उन्हें भ्रम में रखते हुए आज दिनांक तक वकालतनामा एवं फीस प्राप्त नहीं करायी गई है, जबकि वे विगत कई तिथियों से उपस्थित हो रहे है। विपक्षीगण का उपरोक्त कृत्य अविधिक है, तद्नुसार विपक्षी सं0-1 लगायत 6 को अगली निश्चित तिथि पर अपने अधिवक्ता को सम्पूर्ण विवरण एवं वकालतनामा उपलब्ध कराये जाने हेतु निर्देशित किया जाता है, साथ ही श्री मुजीब एफेण्डी परिवाद सं0-37/2021 के परिवादी को आदेशित किया जाता है कि वे विपक्षीगण के वर्तमान निवास स्थल का विवरण 02 सप्ताह की अवधि में कार्यालय के माध्यम से प्रस्तुत परिवाद की पत्रावली पर उपलब्ध कराये। साथ ही विपक्षीगण के अधिवक्ता को भी प्राप्त कराये।
प्रस्तुत परिवाद को परिवाद सं0-37/2021 के साथ पुन: दिनांक 08.02.2023 को सुनवाई हेतु सूचीबद्ध किया जावे।“
:7:
Thereafter on 26-05-2023 the following order has been passed by this Court.
“26-05-2023 :-
पुकार करवाई गई। परिवादिनी द्वारा विपक्षी को प्रस्तुत परिवाद के सम्बन्ध में दस्ती माध्यम से नोटिस एक माह में प्राप्त कराई जावे तथा अगली तिथि पर विपक्षी द्वारा प्रश्नगत अपार्टमेण्ट के वास्तविक निर्माण की प्रगति के बारे में सरंगीन चित्र विविध प्रार्थना पत्र के साथ इस न्यायालय के सम्मुख प्रस्तुत की जावे।
तदनुसार प्रस्तुत परिवाद को परिवाद सं0-37/2021 के साथ पुन: दिनांक 21-08-2023 को प्रथम 20 वादों की सूची में सुनवाई हेतु सूचीबद्ध किया जावे।
सम्बद्ध परिवाद सं0-37/2021 के सन्दर्भ में श्री पियूष मणि त्रिपाठी विद्वान अधिवक्ता द्वारा अवगत कराया गया कि विपक्षी की ओर से उन्हें प्रस्तुत परिवाद में अपना पक्ष प्रस्तुत करने हेतु कोई वकालतनामा प्राप्त नहीं कराया गया है अत्एव उनका नाम वाद सूची से हटा दिया जाए।
तदनुसार कार्यालय को निर्देशित किया जाता है कि श्री पियूष मणि त्रिपाठी अधिवक्ता का नाम अगली निश्चित तिथि पर वाद सूची से हटा दिया जाए। “
The case is called out.
No one has appeared on behalf of the either of the parties.
In the interest of justice the case is being taken up for decision on the basis of facts and circumstances of the case as well as on the basis of materials available on record.
The opposite parties have failed to handover the allotted Flat being Flat No. E-305 to the complainant in time whereas the complainant has paid huge amount of Rs.38,00,000/- to the opposite parties and the sale deed of the said flat has been executed in favour of the complainant on 31-07-2021.
:8:
From the aforesaid facts it is crystal clear that the physical possession of the aforesaid Flat has not been handed over to the complainant. The entire amount was deposited by the complainant which must have been utilized by the opposite parties for which the opposite parties are guilty.
The opposite parties are not supposed to play fraud with the complainant. In the instant case it is clearly established that the opposite party has misused the money deposited by the complainant, hence this Court has no option but to allow the instant complaint.
Having perused the entire record of the case and after considering the facts and circumstances of the case I am of the considered opinion that the opposite parties have committed gross deficiency in service and the claim of the complainant appears to be justified and the complainant is entitled to get the actual physical possession of Flat No. 305-E from the opposite parties with compensation as well as cost of the case
In view of the aforesaid, I am of the considered opinion that the complaint is liable to be allowed with cost
ORDER
The complaint is allowed with the following directions.
- The opposite parties are directed to finish the Flat and building and deliver the physical possession of Flat No. 305-E, Third Floor, Allayah Lake View Apartment, situated at Vikalp Khand-3, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow to the complainant and to get the Completion Certificate from Lucknow Development Authority immediately.
- The opposite parties are directed to pay to the complainant interest at the rate of 09% per annum on the deposited amount of Rs.38,00,000/- from the date of deposits till the date of actual physical possession of the said Flat.
:9:
- The opposite parties are directed to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lacs Only) as compensation towards mental agony, harassment and financial losses.
- The opposite parties will pay sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) towards the cost of the case.
- The entire amount as directed hereinabove will be paid by the opposite parties to the complainant within a period of 30 days from the date of this order.
Let copy of this order be made available to the parties as per rules.
The Stenographer is requested to upload this order on the website of this Commission today itself.
( JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR )
PRESIDENT
Pnt.
ORAL
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,
UTTAR PRADESH, LUCKNOW
COMPLAINT NO. 37 OF 2021
Mujeeb Effendi
S/o Late Sri S K Effendi
R/o Old Bhopal House
Lalbagh, Lucknow-226001.
...Complainant
Vs.
- Gangotri Constructions
001, Ground Floor
Allaya Galaxy Apartment
66-B, Butlerganj
Prag Narain Road, Lucknow.
Through its Managing Partner
- Yazdan Builders
001, Ground Floor
Allaya Apartment
43/01, Wazir Hasan Road
Lucknow
Through its Managing Partner
- Fahad Yazdani, Partner
Yazdan Builders
001 Ground Floor
Allaya Apartment
43/1, Wazir Hasan Road, Lucknow
- Sayem Yazdani, Partner
Yazdan Builders
001 Ground Floor
Allaya Apartment
43/1, Wazir Hasan Road, Lucknow
- Riyaz Ali Khan, Partner
Yazdan Builders
001 Ground Floor
Allaya Apartment
43/1, Wazir Hasan Road, Lucknow
- Mr. Rehan Mohammad, Partner
Gangotri Constructions
S/o Mr. Aan Mohammad
R/o Dhaam Mohalla, Near Masjid,
Panna, Madhya Pradesh
:2:
- Smt. Kashifa Hashmi, Partner
Gangotri Constructions
D/o Syed Fida Husan
R/o Mohalla-Khaipur, Zila-Banda
- Mr. Aizajuddeen, Partner
Gangotri Constructions
S/o Mr. Sirajuddin
R/o Mohalla Khaipur, Zila Banda
- Shahnawaz Khan, Partnr
Gangotri Constructions
S/o Mr Nasir Khan
R/o Near Madina Masjid
Chatarpur Road, Matipura, Mahoba
- Mohd. Asif Siddiqui, Partner
Gangotri Constructions
S/o Haji Abdul Gani
Mohalla Raniganj
Zila Panna, Madhya Pradesh
...Opposite Parties
BEFORE:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR, PRESIDENT
For the Complainant : Sri Vikas Agarwal, Advocate.
For the Opposite Party : None appeared.
Dated : 21-08-2023
JUDGMENT
MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR, PRESIDENT
The instant complaint has been filed by the complainant under Section 47(i) & (ii) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 with the following prayer:-
“Wherefore it is most graciously be prayed:-
01.That this Hon’ble Forum may kindly be gracious to direct the opposite parties to execute and register sale deed of Flat No.502-B, Fifth Floor, Allayah Lake View Apartment situated at Vikalp Khand-3, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow after getting the map sanctioned from LDA and further pay interest at the rate of 24% from the date of
:3:
deposit of money till the date of actual physical possession and registration of sale deed.
-
In the alternative this Hon’ble Commission may kindly be pleased to order the opposite parties to refund a sum of Rs.34,33,000/- along with 24% interest from the date of deposit till the date of actual payment.
(2)That this Hon’ble Commission may kindly be pleased to order the opposite parties to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs.50,00,000/- as compensation on account of mental tension and agony as inflicted by the negligent act of opposite parties and also on account of unfair contract.
(3)That this Hon’ble Forum may kindly be pleased to direct the opposite parties to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs.20,000/- per month on account of rent from the date of allotment till the date of actual delivery of physical possession.
(4)That this Hon’ble Commission may kindly be pleased to direct the opposite parties to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- on account of cost of suit.
(5)That any other relief deemed fit and appropriate under the facts and circumstances of the case may also be awarded to the complainant against the opposite parties. “
From the bare perusal of the contents mentioned in the complaint and the documents available on record this fact is brought to the notice of this Court that the complainant has booked a Flat with the opposite parties No. 01 and 02 namely M/s Gangotri Constructions, 001, Ground Floor, Allaya Galaxy Apartment, 66-B, Butlerganj, Prag Narain Road, Lucknow and Yazdan Builders 001, Ground Floor, Allaya Apartment, 43/01, Wazir Hasan Road, Lucknow of which opposite party Nos. 03, 04, and 05 are the partners of Yazdan Builders and the opposite parties No. 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10 are partners of opposite party No.01 Gangotri
:4:
Constructions. The cost of the Flat was Rs.31,00,000/-. The complainant has paid the total sum of Rs.29,83,800 to the opposite party. The opposite parties concealed the true fact regarding title of land and sanction of map from Development Authority. The opposite parties in connivance with each other have been duping people by claiming the Apartments to be legally sanctioned by LDA.
It has been stated in the complaint that on several occasions the complainant requested the opposite parties to either execute the sale deed of said flat after procuring sanction of Map from LDA else refund the deposited amount alongwith interest. In the month of July,2020 the opposite parties informed to the complainant that soon sale deed be executed after obtaining sanction of map from LDA and in this respect the opposite parties requested the complainant to get the interior woodwork as per his choice. On the commitment of opposite parties the complainant hired carpenter of opposite parties Sri Imran and spent an additional sum of Rs.4,50,000/- in completing modular kitchen, wooden panes, windows, doors and cupboards.
It is further stated in the complaint that all the interior wood work got wasted as till date neither the opposite parties got cleared the sanctioned map from the LDA nor the opposite parties completed the project. At present the building is still incomplete and lacks electricity, lift, completion certificate, occupation certificate, water tanks, plaster, paining etc. Now the opposite parties are pressing upon the complainant as well as other allottees of flats to get the building completed out of their own funds as they are running short of money. Besides this the opposite parties are also pressing upon allottees to liaison with Development Authority for approval of building layout plan whereas at the time of allotment of flat the opposite parties apprised that they have duly sanctioned map from Development Authority. The opposite
:5:
parties collected huge money from the allottees on fake promises and the money thus collected had lavishly been spent by them on their luxuries and other projects thereby leaving the allottees in a lurch.
Admittedly the instant complaint has been entertained and the notices were issued to the opposite parties by this Court vide order dated 02-12-2021 which is extracted hereinbelow:-
“02-12-2021
Sri Vikas Agarwal, learned Counsel for the complainant appeared.
Heard learned Counsel for the complainant.
Issue notice to all the opposite parties.
The complainant will also serve the Dasti notice within two weeks.
On the next date fixed the opposite parties will file their reply and the opposite party Nos. 03, 04, 08 and 10, who are the main partners/persons behind the project launched by the opposite party Nos. 01 and 02 will appear before this Court on the next date fixed.
List as First Case on 13-01-2022.”
Admittedly the actual physical possession of the allotted flat being Flat No. B-502 has not been given to the complainant till filing of the instant complaint and also the registration of sale deed has not been done, hence the present complaint has been filed before this Court which is pending before this Court and on several dates the matter has been listed and orders are regularly passed.
Before deciding the complaint it is necessary to furnish the details of various orders passed by this Court on different dates.
On 13-01-2022 the following order has been passed by this Court mentioning the previous order dated 02-12-2021:-
13-01-2022
:6:
वाद पुकारा गया। प्रस्तुत परिवाद में इस न्यायालय द्वारा दिनांक 02.12.2021 को निम्न आदेश पारित किया गया था:-
"Sri Vikas Agarwal, learned Counsel for the complainant appeared.
Heard learned Counsel for the complainant.
Issue notice to all the opposite parties.
The complainant will also serve the Dasti notice within two weeks.
On the next date fixed the opposite parties will file their reply and the opposite party Nos. 03, 04, 08 and 10, who are the main partners/persons behind the project launched by the opposite party Nos. 01 and 02 will appear before this Court on the next date fixed.
List as First Case on 13-01-2022."
उक्त आदेश के अनुपालन में परिवादी द्वारा पंजीकृत डाक से दिनांक 24.12.2021 को विपक्षीगण सं0-3, 4, 8, एवं 10 को नोटिस प्रेषित की, साथ ही अन्य विपक्षीगण को भी नोटिस प्रेषित की गई। आदेश के परिशीलन से स्पष्ट है कि आज विपक्षीगण सं0-3, 4, 8 एवं 10 को इस न्यायालय के सम्मुख उपस्थित होना था।
कार्यालय की आख्या के अनुसार विपक्षीगण सं0-2, 3, 4 एवं 5 को पंजीकृत डाक से प्रेषित नोटिस 'लैफ्ट' की आख्या के साथ वापस मय लिफाफा प्राप्त हुई, जो पत्रावली पर संलग्न है।
विपक्षी सं0-3 एवं 4 का कार्यालय स्थल/निवास निम्नवत् है:-
विपक्षी सं0-3 Fahad Yazdani, पार्टनर, याजदान बिल्डर्स 001, ग्राउण्ड फ्लोर, अलाया अपार्टमेंट 43/1, वज़ीर हसन रोड, लखनऊ।
विपक्षी सं0-4 Sri Sayem Yazdani, पार्टनर, याजदान बिल्डर्स 001, ग्राउण्ड फ्लोर, अलाया अपार्टमेंट 43/1, वज़ीर हसन रोड, लखनऊ।
परिवादी श्री मुजीब एफेण्डी जो स्वंय उपस्थित है, के द्वारा इस न्यायालय को सूचित किया गया कि वास्तव में विपक्षी सं0-3, 4 एवं 5 उपरोक्त परिसर में ग्राउण्ड फ्लोर पर कार्यालय चलाते हैं तथा उपरोक्त परिसर के पैंट हाउस में निवासित है तथा वर्तमान में उनके द्वारा नोटिस न लिये जाने को दृष्टिगत रखते हुए कार्यालय को बन्द दिखाया जाता है, जबकि वे उसी स्थल पर उपलब्ध रहते हैं।
उक्त तथ्यों को दृष्टिगत रखते हुए जिलाधिकारी लखनऊ एवं पुलिस आयुक्त लखनऊ को आदेशित किया जाता है कि वे इस न्यायालय द्वारा जारी जमानती वारण्ट के अनुपालन में विपक्षी सं0-3
:7:
Fahad Yazdani एवं विपक्षी सं0-4 Sayem Yazdani की उपस्थिति अगली तिथि पर सुनिश्चित कराये।
विपक्षी सं0-8 Mr Aizajuddeen, पार्टनर गंगोत्री कंस्ट्रक्शन पुत्र श्री सिराजुद्दीन, निवासी मोहल्ला खाईपुर, जिला बॉदा की उपस्थिति हेतु जमानती वारण्ट द्वारा जिलाधिकारी बॉदा एवं वरिष्ठ पुलिस अधीक्षक बॉदा को निबन्धक, राज्य उपभोक्ता आयोग 02 सप्ताह में जारी करें, जो अगली तिथि पर विपक्षी सं0-8 Mr Aizajuddeen की उपस्थिति इस न्यायालय के सम्मुख सुनिश्चित करे।
विपक्षी सं0-10 मो0 आसिफ सिद्दीकी, पार्टनर गंगोत्री कंस्ट्रक्शन पुत्र हाजीअब्दुल गनी, मोहल्ला रानीगंज, जिला पन्ना मध्य प्रदेश में निवासित/कार्यरत है, की उपस्थिति हेतु निबन्धक, राज्य उपभोक्ता आयोग को आदेशित किया जाता है कि वे विपक्षी सं0-10 की उपस्थिति हेतु जमानती वारण्ट जिलाधिकारी पन्ना एवं पुलिस अधीक्षक/वरिष्ठ पुलिस अधीक्षक, मध्य प्रदेश को 02 सप्ताह में प्रेषित करें, जो उपरोक्त जमानती वारण्ट को दृष्टिगत रखते हुए विपक्षी सं0-10 की उपस्थिति अगली तिथि पर इस न्यायालय के सम्मुख सुनिश्चित करें।
यहॉ यह कहना भी समीचीन होगा कि यदि अगली तिथि पर विपक्षी सं0-3 व 4 जो कि लखनऊ के निवासी हैं, अनुपस्थित रहेंगे तब उनके विरूद्ध गैर जमानती वारण्ट एवं अन्तर्गत धारा-71/72 उपभोक्ता संरक्षण अधिनियम, 2019 की कार्यवाही पर विचार किया जावेगा।
प्रस्तुत परिवाद को पुन: दिनांक 10.3.2022 को प्रथम 20 वादों की सूची में सुनवाई हेतु सूचीबद्ध किया जावे।“
Further in the instant complaint inspite of service of notices upon the opposite parties and non appearance of the opposite parties the following order has been passed on 10-03-2022 mentioning the previous order dated 13-01-2022.
“10-03-2022
प्रस्तुत परिवाद में दिनांक 13.01.2022 को विपक्षीगण द्वारा नोटिस के उपरान्त उपस्थिति न दर्ज कराने पर निम्नलिखित आदेश पारित किया गया था:-
“.............................. उक्त आदेश के अनुपालन में निबंधक राज्य आयोग द्वारा जमानती वारण्ट पत्रांक सं0 4338 एवं 4337 वरिष्ठ पुलिस
:8:
अधीक्षक, बॉदा का एवं जिलाधिकारी बॉदा को प्रेषित किया गया, साथ ही जमानती वारण्ट पत्रांक सं0 4336 दिनांक 17.01.2022 एवं पत्रांक सं0 4335 दिनांक 17.01.2022 जिलाधिकारी लखनऊ एवं पुलिस आयुक्त लखनऊ को प्रेषित किये गये। उक्त जमानती वारण्ट के संबंध में कार्यालय की आख्यानुसार दिनांक 28.02.2022 तक कोई आख्या प्राप्त नहीं होना अंकित किया गया, चूंकि विगत 01 माह से विधान सभा के चुनाव की व्यवस्था को दृष्टिगत रखते हुए उपरोक्त जिलाधिकारी एवं वरिष्ठ पुलिस अधीक्षक एवं पुलिस आयुक्त जमानती वारण्ट के बारे में समुचित कार्यवाही सुनिश्चितन कर सके हों अतएव उक्त जमानती वारण्ट के परिप्रेक्ष्य में उपरोक्त अधिकारीगण से विपक्षीगण की उपस्थिति अपेक्षित है। तदनुसार अगली तिथि से पूर्व कार्यालय जमानती वारण्ट के संबंध में अपनी आख्या प्रस्तुत करे।
प्रस्तुत परिवाद दिनांक 18.04.2022 को संबंधित परिवाद सं0 03/2022 के साथ प्रथम 20 वादों में सुनवाई हेतु सूचीबद्ध किया जावे।“
On 18-04-2022 again this Court has passed the following order mentioning the previous order dated 10-03-2022.
“18-04-2022
पुकारा गया।
विपक्षी की ओर से विद्वान अधिवक्ता श्री पियुष मणि त्रिपाठी उपस्थित है। दिनांक 10.3.2022 को निम्न आदेश पारित किया गया था:-
…………… उक्त आदेश के अनुपालन में विपक्षी निर्माता कम्पनी के डायरेक्टर अर्थात विपक्षी संख्या 3, 4 एवं 8 व 10 को वरिष्ठ पुलिस अधीक्षक लखनऊ, पुलिस आयुक्त लखनऊ एवं जिलाधिकारी लखनऊ के माध्यम से जमानती वारण्ट के अनुपालन में आज उपस्थित होना था परन्तु उपरोक्त विपक्षीगण आज अनुपस्थित हैं। चूंकि विपक्षीगण की ओर उपस्थित विद्वान अधिवक्ता श्री पियुष मणि त्रिपाठी द्वारा उपरोक्त विपक्षीगण की उपस्थिति हेतु इस न्यायालय के सम्मुख विपक्षीगण से प्राप्त आश्वासन के अनुसार यह कथन किया गया कि अगली निश्चित तिथि पर निश्चित रूप से उपरोक्त विपक्षीगण इस न्यायालय के सम्मुख उपस्थित होकर अपना पक्ष प्रस्तुत करेगें
:9:
तदनुसार प्रस्तुत परिवाद एवं परिवाद संख्या 03/22 को प्रथम 20 वादों की सूची में दिनांक 10.05.2022 को सूचीबद्ध किए जाने हेतु आदेशित किया जाता है।
यहां यह स्पष्ट किया जाता है कि यदि उपरोक्त विपक्षीगण अपने अधिवक्ता के आश्वासन के अनुसार अनुपस्थित रहेगें तब उनके विरूद्ध गैर जमानती वारण्ट जारी किया जावेगा साथ ही उनका बैंक एकाउण्ट एवं चल-अचल सम्पत्ति अन्तर्गत धारा 71/72 अधिनियम 2019, कार्यवाही सुनिश्चित की जाएगी।
कार्यालय को निर्देशित किया जाता है कि अगली तिथि पर विपक्षी के विद्वान अधिवक्ता श्री पियुष मणि त्रिपाठी का नाम काजलिष्ट में अंकित करना सुनिश्चित करें।“
Thereafter on 22-12-2022 the following order has been passed by this Court.
“22-12-2022
पुकार की गई। विपक्षी की ओर से विद्वान अधिवक्ता श्री पियूष मणि त्रिपाठी उपस्थित है, लेकिन उनके द्वारा कथन किया गया कि विपक्षीगण द्वारा उन्हें भ्रम में रखते हुए आज दिनांक तक वकालतनामा एवं फीस प्राप्त नहीं करायी गई है, जबकि वे विगत कई तिथियों से उपस्थित हो रहे है। विपक्षीगण का उपरोक्त कृत्य अविधिक है, तद्नुसार विपक्षी सं0-1 लगायत 6 को अगली निश्चित तिथि पर अपने अधिवक्ता को सम्पूर्ण विवरण एवं वकालतनामा उपलब्ध कराये जाने हेतु निर्देशित किया जाता है, साथ ही श्री मुजीब एफेण्डी परिवाद सं0-37/2021 के परिवादी को आदेशित किया जाता है कि वे विपक्षीगण के वर्तमान निवास स्थल का विवरण 02 सप्ताह की अवधि में कार्यालय के माध्यम से प्रस्तुत परिवाद की पत्रावली पर उपलब्ध कराये। साथ ही विपक्षीगण के अधिवक्ता को भी प्राप्त कराये।
प्रस्तुत परिवाद को परिवाद सं0-03/2022 के साथ पुन: दिनांक 08.02.2023 को सुनवाई हेतु सूचीबद्ध किया जावे।“
The case is called out.
Sri Vikas Agrawal, learned Counsel for the complainant appeared.
:10:
No one has appeared on behalf of the opposite parties inspite of sufficient service of notice and in this regard various orders were passed by this Court which have been mentioned hereinabove.
I have heard learned Counsel for the complainant and perused the record.
It has been argued by the learned Counsel for the complainant that the opposite parties had got the money deposited by suppressing and concealing the true fact regarding title of land and sanction of map from development authority. The opposite parties in connivance with each other have been duping people by claiming the Apartments to be legally sanctioned by LDA.
It is further argued by the learned Counsel for the complainant that neither the opposite parties got cleared the sanctioned map from the LDA nor the opposite parties completed the project. At present the building is still incomplete and lacks so many deficiencies. The opposite parties are pressing upon the complainant as well as other allottes of flats to get the building completed out of their own funds as they are running short of money. The opposite parties also pressing upon allottees to liaison with development authority for approval of building layout plan.
It has been argued by the learned Counsel for the complainant that the opposite parties are guilty of deficiency in service, hence the complainant is entitled to damages. The Hon’ble State Commission has territorial jurisdiction as well as pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain instant complaint.
From the aforesaid facts it is crystal clear that the opposite parties have failed to give actual physical possession of the allotted Flat being Flat No.B-502 and also failed to make registration of sale deed whereas the complainant has paid huge amount of Rs.29,83,800/- plus additional sum of Rs.4,50,000/- towards completing modular kitchen, wooden panes, windows, doors and cupboards etc. The entire amount was deposited by the complainant
:11:
which must have been utilized by the opposite parties for which the opposite parties are guilty.
The opposite parties are not supposed to play fraud with the complainant. In the instant case it is clearly established that the opposite party has misused the money deposited by the complainant, hence this Court has no option but to allow the instant complaint.
Having heard the argument of learned Counsel for the complainant and after considering the facts and circumstances of the case I am of the considered opinion that the opposite parties have committed gross deficiency in service and the submission of learned Counsel for the complainant appears to be justified and the complainant is entitled to get the actual physical possession as well as registration of sale deed of the flat allotted to him by the opposite parties with compensation as well as cost of the case or in alternative the opposite parties to refund a sum of Rs.34,33,000/- alongwith interest at the rate of 09% from the date of deposit till the date of actual payment with compensation as well as cost of the case.
In view of the aforesaid, I am of the positive opinion that the argument of the learned Counsel for the complainant has force and thus the complaint of the complainant is liable to be allowed with cost.
ORDER
The complaint is allowed with the following directions.
01.The opposite parties are directed to execute and register sale deed of Flat No.502-B, Fifth Floor, Allayah Lake View Apartment situated at Vikalp Khand-3, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow after getting the map sanctioned from LDA and further pay interest at the rate of 09% from the date of deposit of money till the date of actual physical possession and registration of sale deed.
-
-
In the alternative the opposite parties are directed to refund a sum of Rs.34,33,000/- along with 09% interest from the date of deposit till the date of actual payment.
02. The opposite parties are directed to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lacs Only) as compensation on account of mental tension and agony as inflicted by the negligent act of opposite parties and also on account of unfair contract.
03.The opposite parties are directed to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) on account of cost of suit.
05. The entire amount as directed hereinabove will be paid by the opposite parties to the complainant within a period of 30 days from the date of this order.
Let copy of this order be made available to the parties as per rules.
The Stenographer is requested to upload this order on the website of this Commission today itself.
( JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR )
PRESIDENT
Pnt.
