DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-I, U.T. CHANDIGARH

===

Lt.Col.Lakhbir Singh Bedi (Retd.), Advocate F-84, Army Flats, Sec.4, MDC, Panchkula-134114.

        ---Complainant

                                V E R S U S

1]     Greater Mohali Area Development Authority, Sector 62, SAS Nagar (Mohali), through its Chief Administrator.

2]     IDBI bank, Sector 8-C, Chandigarh.

                                        ---Opposite Parties

CORAM:   SH.RAJINDER SINGH GILL                      

PRESIDING MEMBER

DR.[MRS]MADANJIT KAUR SAHOTA        

MEMBER

Argued by:        Complainant in person.

Sh.Anuj Kohli, Counsel for OP No.1.

        Sh.Sourabh Bindra, Counsel for OP No.2.

PER DR.[MRS]MADANJIT KAUR SAHOTA, MEMBER

          This complaint was earlier dismissed vide order dated 16^th Nov., 2012, by this Forum.  Aggrieved against the said order, the complainant went in Appeal before the Hon’ble State Commission. The Hon’ble State Commission, vide its order dated 19.04.2012, accepted the Appeal by setting aside the impugned order and remanded the complaint back, to this Forum, with a direction, to decide it on merits, after affording the parties, an opportunity of being heard.

2]             Precisely put, the complainant applied for a plot 250 sq. yards at Zirakpur vide application No.3610 (Ann.C-2) along with draft No.024914, dated 13.01.2003 for an amount of Rs.3000/- as per advertisement of OP-1 (Ann.C-1).  As per the terms & conditions of the advisement, in case, the allotment is not made within two years from the date of closing of the demand survey, the PUDA would refund the application money within a period of three months of expiry of two years without interest. According to the complainant, since the period of three months of expiry of two years had expired on 30.04.05, OP-1 was requested to refund the amount with interest for five years @ 10% w.e.f. 20.01.03, vide registered letter dated 18.09.2010 (Annexure C-3). Vide letter dated 15.10.10 (Ann.C-4), the complainant was required to submit the original receipt for refund. The complainant sent the original receipt along with the legal notice dated 03.06.2011 (Ann. C-5) but to no effect.

3]             OP-1 filed its written statement, stating therein, that the amount of Rs.3000/- has already been dispatched to the complainant vide cheque bearing No.371128 dated 11.08.2011 drawn on Axis bank, Phase-7, Mohali. It has been pleaded that the period of three months as per condition No.8 of the advertisement expired on 30.04.2005, however, the complainant approached the OPs for refund of the amount in the year 2010 i.e. after 5 years and therefore, the complaint is liable to be dismissed on this fact alone. Pleading that the complainant is not entitled for interest @ 10% p.a. as prayed for, OP-1 has prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

4]             In its separate written statement, OP-2 pleaded that the complainant has made no grievance against the replying OP and therefore, the complaint qua it is liable to be dismissed.

5]             Parties led evidence in support of their contentions.

6]             We have heard the Complainant in person and learned counsel OPs and have also perused the record. 

7]             According to the Complainant, he applied for a plot of 250 sq. yds. at Zirakpur, vide application [Ann.C-2], along with draft dated 13.01.2003 for Rs.3,000/- per advertisement of OP No.1 [Annexure C-1]. It was submitted that as per terms & conditions of the advertisement, in case the allotment is not made within 02 years from the date of closing of the demand survey, PUDA would refund the application money, within a period of 03 months of expiry of 02 years, without interest. According to the Complainant, since the period of 03 months of expiry of 02 years expired on 30.04.2005, he is entitled for the refund of the amount with interest @10% with effect from 20.01.2003. 

8]             The objection raised by the learned counsel for OP No.1 that the Complainant is not a consumer, has already been decided by the Hon’ble State Commission, U.T., Chandigarh, while remanding the case back to this Forum vide order dated 19.4.2011.  It has been held by the Hon’ble State Commission that the complainant fell within the definition of a consumer.  Similar principle of law, was laid down in Lucknow Development Authority Vs. M.K.Gupta III(1993) CPJ & (SC).  Since, the complainant fell within the definition of a potential user, he was a consumer and thus the present complaint is maintainable.   

9]             It was pleaded that the amount of Rs.3000/- has already been received by the Complainant vide Cheque bearing No. 371128, dated 11.08.2011, drawn on AXIS Bank, Phase-VII, Mohali. It was also argued that the period of 03 months, as per Condition No.8 of the advertisement (C-1) expired on 30.04.2005 and the Complainant approached the OP for refund of the amount in the year 2010. Therefore, he is not entitled for any relief.

10]           The Complainant had received the amount of Rs.3,000/- on 24.09.2011, as has been admitted in the written arguments at Para No.5.  But, the grouse of the complainant is that the OPs had not paid him the interest thereon for the period it remained with OPs, which is illegal and unjustified.  

11]           After going through the facts & circumstances of the case, perusing the documents on record and hearing the parties, it has been made out that the question which needs to be determined is that whether the complainant is entitled for the interest on the amount of Rs.3000/- deposited with OPs, for the period it remained with them, beyond the contractual period, as was set out in terms & conditions, as per Condition No.8 (supra). 

12]           Admittedly, in response to the advertisement issued by OP-1, the complainant applied for a plot of 250 sq. yards at Zirakpur vide application No.3610 (Ann.C-2) and paid a sum of Rs.3000/- as application money vide draft dated 13.1.2003.  It is also the admitted case of the OP-1 that said amount had been paid to the complainant on 24.9.2011 without interest.  It is further admitted by OP-1 that the area, which was to be developed, could not be developed on account of some litigation between it and the farmers, whose land was acquired.

13]           Clause-8 of the Advertisement (Ann.C-1) reads as under:-

“8.    In case the scheme is withdrawn or allotments are not made within two years from the date of closing of the Demand Survey, for any reason whatsoever, PUDA will refund the application money to the applicants within a maximum period of three months of the expiry of the two years without interest.”

14]           A bare perusal of this clause, makes it apparently clear that the application money was to be refunded within three months after the expiry of two years in case the scheme is withdrawn or allotment is not made.  Thus, the amount was to be refunded within three months after the expiry of two years from the date of closing of the demand survey.  Undisputedly, the amount was refunded to the complainant only on 24.9.2011 and that too after filing of the present complaint and during its pendency, that too without interest upto date.  Such an act of the OP-1 clearly amount to deficiency in service on its part.  The OP No.1 certainly utilized the said amount for such a long time, hence it is liable to pay interest on the amount kept by it from the date of deposit till it was returned/paid. 

15]           Henceforth, in view of the foregoings discussion & findings, we are of the opinion that the deficiency in service on the part of OP-1 is writ large.  The complainant has fully proved his case.  Therefore, the present complaint having lot of merit, weight and substance, is hereby allowed. The OP No.1 is directed to pay interest @9% p.a. to the complainant on the amount of Rs.3000/- from the date of its deposit i.e. 13.1.2003 to 24.09.2011 (the date of payment).  The OP No.1 is also directed to pay Rs.5000/- as compensation and Rs.2500/- towards litigation expenses.

                This order be complied with by the OP-1 within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order, failing which it shall be liable to pay the above awarded amount of Rs.5000/- along with interest @12% p.a. from the date of filing this complaint i.e. 20.12.2011 till its actual payment, besides paying interest amount and litigation costs, as aforesaid.

16]           However, the complaint qua OP No.2 stands dismissed.

                Certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge. The file be consigned.