Chandigarh

DF-II

CC/572/2018

Nimrat Sharma - Complainant(s)

Versus

Gionee - Opp.Party(s)

Rahul Verma Adv. & Mohit Verma Adv.

03 Jan 2019

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II

U.T. CHANDIGARH

 

Consumer Complaint No.	:	385/2018
Date of Institution	:	10.07.2018
Date of Decision	:	02.01.2019

 

                                                

                  

 

1.       Usha Rani w/o Sh.Rajiv Kataria r/o H.No2335/3, Sector 45-C, Chandigarh

 

2.       Davinder Kumar s/o Sh.Sahib Chand r/o H.No.115, Village Malakpur Bhimarha, Tehsil Bhudlada, District Mansa, Punjab.

…..Complainants

V E R S U S

1.       M/s Nature Heights Infra Ltd., through its Managing Director/Authorized Representative/Manager, 9  Sunder Nagari, Hanumangarh Road, Abohar (Pb.).

2.       Branch Manager Chandigarh, M/s Nature Heights Infra Ltd., r/o # 65, Sector 41-B, Near Gurudwara Buterela, Chandigarh.

          (OP No.2 deleted vide order dated 29.11.2018)

……Opposite Parties

BEFORE:      SHRI RAJAN DEWAN, PRESIDENT

SMT.PRITI MALHOTRA, MEMBER

SH.RAVINDER SINGH, MEMBER

 

Argued by: -

                   Sh.Arjun Grover, Adv. for the complainant

                   OP No.1 exparte.

 

PER RAJAN DEWAN, PRESIDENT

1.       Briefly stated, being allured by the representations of the OPs, the complainants booked a unit of 1000 sq. ft. plot comprised of khewat No.392 to 413, Khatauni No.576 to 823, Khasra No.811 at Village Bringali  Mukerian, Distt. Hoshiarpur, Punjab. On 01.11.2012, an agreement for sale of plot Ref. ID No.10043180 was executed between the complainants and OP No.1.  The total price of the unit was fixed at Rs.2,25,000/-  which was to be paid in 4 easy installments before the execution of the sale deed. The complainants paid 1^st installment of Rs.56,250/- through cheque dated 17.09.2012 before the execution of the agreement for sale. The complainants have also paid the second and third installments of Rs.56,250/- each through two cheques dated 15.11.2013 and 04.11.2014.  The complainants deposited in all a sum of Rs.1,68,750/- with the OP-Company.   It has further been averred that they approached the OPs in the year 2016 for giving the physical possession of the unit but the OP-Company flatly refused to do so.  It has further been averred that the OP –Company has failed to execute the sale deed within 4 years from the date of the sale agreement still date.  It has further been averred that the OPs have not complied with the conditions of the agreement for sale and now the OP-Company is trying to grab the amounts deposited by them. Alleging that the aforesaid acts amount to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of OPs, the complainant has filed the instant complaint. 
2.        OP No.1 did not appear despite due service through publication and as such it was ordered to be proceeded against exparte vide order dated 26.10.2018.
3.        The complainant led evidence in support of his contentions. 
4.         We have gone through the record and heard the arguments advanced by the Counsel for the complainant.
5.           In his exparte evidence, the complainant No.1 has tendered her duly sworn affidavit along with the supporting documents as mentioned in the complaint. Annexure C-1 is the copy of the agreement entered into between the complainants and OP-Company in respect of the unit in question measuring 1000 sq. ft. for an amount of Rs.2,25,000/-.   Annexure C-2 (colly.) are the photocopies of the receipts/cheques regarding the amount deposited by the complainants with the OP-Company. As per the record, the complainants deposited a sum of Rs.1,68,750/- through different installments to the OP-Company but no progress was made qua development of the plot and handing over of the intended possession within the stipulated period.   Even OP No.1 did not turn up to contest the case of the complainants and to show that the requisite license/permissions/approvals from the competent authorities have been granted in its favour to develop the project.  Thus, we have no hesitation to conclude that OP No.1 did not have the requisite license, permissions/approval from the competent authorities to develop the project at the time of booking the unit which itself amounts to deficiency in service as also indulgence into unfair trade practice.  Moreover, the OP-Company has failed to refund the deposited amount to the complainants despite their repeated requests which amounts to deficiency in service on the part of OP No.1.
6.          In view of the above discussion, the consumer complaint deserves to succeed and the same is accordingly partly allowed qua OP No.1 only. OP No.1 is directed as under :-

1. To refund Rs.1,68,750/- to the complainants along with interest @ 12% per annum from the respective dates of its deposit, till its realization.
2. To pay Rs.10,000/- as compensation for mental agony and harassment to the complainants;
3. To pay Rs.10,000/- as costs of litigation.

7.           This order be complied with by OP No.1 within 45 days from the date of receipt of its certified copy, failing which the complainant is entitled to initiate the proceedings against it under Sections 25/27 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. 
8.           Certified copy of this order be communicated to the parties, free of charge. After compliance file be consigned to record room.

sd/-                      sd/-                               sd/-

Announced	[RAVINDER SINGH]	[RAJAN DEWAN]	(PRITI MALHOTRA)
02/01/2019	MEMBER	PRESIDENT	MEMBER