Chandigarh

DF-I

CC/833/2021

Mahesh Dhiman - Complainant(s)

Versus

Greater Mohali Area Development Authority - Opp.Party(s)

Ranjinder Singh Sidhu

06 Apr 2023

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION-I,

U.T. CHANDIGARH

 

                    

Consumer Complaint No.	:	CC/833/2021
Date of Institution	:	29.11.2021
Date of Decision	:	06/04/2023

 

Mahesh Dhiman son of Ram Parkash Dhiman resident of House No.2051-D, Sector 63, CHB, U.T., Chandigarh.

.

… Complainant

V E R S U S

1.   Greater Mohali Area Development Authority, PUDA Bhawan, Sector 62, SAS Nagar, Punjab through its Chief Administrator. Email. www.gmada.gov.in

2.   Greater Mohali Area Development Authority, PUDA Bhawan, Sector 62, SAS Nagar, Punjab through its Estate Officer, (IT City), Mohali, Punjab Email. www.gmada.gov.in.

 .  … Opposite Parties

 

CORAM :	PAWANJIT SINGH	PRESIDENT
	SURJEET KAUR SURESH KUMAR SARDANA	MEMBER MEMBER

                       

ARGUED BY		Sh. Rajinder Singh Sidhu counsel for complainant.
		Sh. Tusar Arora, counsel for OPs.

Per surjeet kaur, Member

1. Briefly stated, the OPs opened a scheme with  750 residential plots in IT City Mohali and the complainant applied in the said scheme and was found successful in draw of lots vide serial No.243 held on 21.9.2016 and received the letter of intent dated 24.12.2016 Ex. C-2 by OPs. The complainant paid all due amount of Rs.50,56,202/- with development authority i.e. OPs No.1&2.  Thereafter vide allotment letter dated 10.7.2020 Ex. C-5 the complainant was allotted plot No. 1213, Sector 83, Alpha, Block-B, measuring 256.66 sq. yard at 750 plots scheme (IT City Mohali). It is stated that as per clause 15 of the letter of intent the physical possession of the said plot was to be handed over to the allottee within a period of one year from the date of issuance of letter of intent. It is alleged that despite making due payment the OPs failed to handover the possession of the plot within the stipulated period despite making various representation and requests to the OPs. It is alleged that there is delay of more than 2 years six month and 17 days in delivering the possession of plot to the complainant and as such, the complainant is entitled for delayed interest. Alleging the aforesaid act of Opposite Parties deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on their part, this complaint has been filed.
2. The Opposite Parties in their reply while admitting the factual matrix of the case stated that the complainant was offered possession of the plot vide Allotment letter dated 10.7.2020 wherein as per clause 9 of the terms and conditions of the allotment letter the complainant was offered possession of the plot which he was bound to take within the given time of 90 days.  It is averred that if between the date of issuance of letter of intent of plot i.e. 24.12.2016 till the offer of possession of plot to him through allotment letter dated 10.7.2020, the complainant was aggrieved with development works of this scheme then as per clause No.27 of the allotment letter he could have refused to accept the offer of allotment within 30 days in that case the deposited amount could have been considered to be refunded to him as per rules but at this stage after accepting the possession of the plot the complainant cannot raise the issue of delay in delivery of plot. Further since he has accepted the possession of plot offered through allotment letter the complainant has accepted performance of the contractual obligations in a manner otherwise than agreed. Thus, the complainant is estopped by his own act and conduct from alleging delay in delivery of possession of plot.  All other allegations made in the complaint has been  denied being wrong. All other allegations made in the complaint has been  denied being wrong.
3. Rejoinder was filed and averments made in the consumer complaint were reiterated
4. Contesting parties led evidence by way of affidavits and documents.
5. We have heard the learned counsel for the contesting parties and gone through the record of the case.
6. The sole grouse of the complainant through the present complaint is that despite full payment towards the purchase of plot in question, the OPs delayed the possession of the same for more than three years, thus they are liable to pay the interest on the amount deposited with them for delaying the possession of the plot in question.
7. The stand taken by the OPs is that as per clause 9 of the terms and conditions of the allotment letter dated 10.07.2020 the complainant was offered possession of the plot, which he was bound to take within 90 days and it was the choice of the complainant to refuse the offer of allotment within 30 days in that case the deposited amount could have been considered to be refunded to him as per rules. Hence, there is no deficiency on their part.
8. It is evident on record that the complainant paid huge amount of Rs.50,56,202/-  towards the plot measuring 256.66 sq. feet  and he was issued letter of intent Exhibit C-2 dated 24.12.2016. A perusal of clause 15 of this intent letter itself shows that the physical possession of the plot in question was to be handed over within a period of one year from the date of issuance of this letter of intent. Meaning thereby it was responsibility of the OPs to handover the plot in question latest by 23.12.2017 after the completion of all development works. Admittedly, the physical possession of the plot in question has been given  to the complainant on 10.07.2020 as is evident from Exhibit C-5.  Thus, there is delay of more than two and half years. The OPs made false representation which were materially incorrect and were made in such a way that the complainant to whom it was made was entitled to rely upon it and he may act in reliance on it. In our opinion the complainant is involved in a disadvantageous contract with OPs and suffered financial loss, mental agony and physical harassment.
9. It may be stated here that it is well settled law that non-delivery of possession of plots/units in a developed project by the promised date is a material violation on the part of a builder/developer. Thus, as in the present case the possession was offered after inordinate delay of more than two and half years, which is itself illegal and arbitrary.
10. It is also matter of common parlance that for purchasing the plot, the purchasers take loans from their family members, relatives and friends or financial institutions. In some cases, the purchasers live on rent in the absence of timely delivery of possession. In the case titled as “Lucknow Development Authority v. M K Gupta” (1994) 1 SCC 243, the Hon’ble Supreme Court discussed about the extent of the jurisdiction of the Consumer Fora to award just and reasonable compensation for the harassment and agony suffered by a consumer. Hence, the act of OPs for delay in offering possession of the plot in question after inordinate delay of more than 3 years tantamounts to deficiency in service and they are liable to pay interest on the deposited amount to the complainant for said deficiency act
11. In view of the above discussion, the present consumer complaint succeeds and the same is accordingly allowed. OPs are directed as under:-

1. to pay interest on the entire deposited amount towards the consideration of the plot in question @9% P.A. from the stipulated date of handing-over of the possession of the plot in question till the date of actual physical and legal delivery of possession to the complainant.
2. to pay Rs.1.00 lakh- to the complainant as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment to him;
3. to pay  Rs.35000/- to the complainant as costs of litigation.

12.      This order be complied with by the OPs within thirty days from the date of receipt of its certified copy, failing which, they shall make the payment of the amounts mentioned at Sr.No.(i) & (ii) above, with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of this order, till realization, apart from compliance of direction at Sr.No.(iii) above
13.      Certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge. The file be consigned

			sd/- [Pawanjit Singh]
			President
			sd/- [Surjeet Kaur] Member   Sd/-
			[Suresh Kumar Sardana]
mp			Member