Haryana

StateCommission

A/145/2014

OMAXE LTD. - Complainant(s)

Versus

HARKESH - Opp.Party(s)

MUNISH GUPTA

19 Jan 2017

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

HARYANA PANCHKULA

 

 

First Appeal No.145 of 2014

Date of the Institution:26.02.2014

Date of Decision:19.01.2017

 

1.      M/s Omaxe Ltd., 9, L.S.C, Kalka Ji, New Delhi-19, through its Prop. Sandeep Garg.

2.      M/s Omaxe Ltd., Omaxe House, 7, (Omaxe Construction Ltd.) New Delhi, through its Authorized Signatory.

Both through their authorized representative namely Sh. Harsh Bhargav, Manager (Legal), M/s Omaxe Ltd., 7, Local Shopping Centre, Kalka Ji, New Delhi.

                                                                             .….Appellants

Versus

Harkesh son of Sh. Lal Singh, resident of House No.83, Jalhaka, Tehsil and District Palwal.

                                                                                                .….Respondent

CORAM:    Mr.R.K.Bishnoi, Judicial Member

                    Mrs. Urvashi Agnihotri, Member

 

Present:-    Mr. Bhupender Singh, Advocate counsel for the appellants.

                    Mr. Vaibhav Parashar, Advocate counsel for the respondent.

 

O R D E R

URVASHI AGNIHOTRI, MEMBER:

 

1. M/s Omaxe Limited-OPs are in appeal against the Order dated 28.01.2014 passed by the learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Palwal (for short ‘District Forum’), whereby the complaint of Harkesh has been allowed by directing the OPs as under:-

“Opposite Parties are directed to accept the breaking installments including future after getting calculation qua the said allotted plot from the complainant with interest @12% per annum and to issue possession letter with regard to the said plot. Opposite parties are further directed to pay Rs.10,000/- as compensation towards mental agony and harassment alongwith Rs.5500/- as litigation expenses within 30 days from the receipt of this order to the complainant”.

2. Briefly stated, according to the complainant, he had purchased the plot, in dispute from one Sh. Pradeep Kumar Rajgarhia, subject to condition that he would deposit/pay the future installments. After accepting the version of Sh. Pradeep Kumar and the complainant, opposite parties changed the name in their records as Harkesh in place of Pradeep Kumar Rajgarhia. The complainant became allottee of the said plot vide registration No.PP218 and deposited a sum of Rs.75,000/- through Pay Order dated 27.07.2006. The complainant alleged that the work had been stopped by the Company at the spot. On enquiry, it transpired that financial position of the market was not satisfactory, hence, the Company had stopped the work of construction. When the complainant visited the office of the OP for depositing the due installments with interest on the start of construction work at site then the officials had put pressure upon him to sell the said plot to them and take premium but the complainant refused to do so. The complainant informed OPs two months ago that he was in a position to deposit installments regularly in future alongwith breaking installments and requested to make the calculation of break installment with interest so that the he could deposit the same without further delay but OP avoided the matter on one pretext or the other. Finally OP refused to accept the request of the complainant and alleging deficiency in service on the part of the OPs, the complainant approached the District Forum for the Redressal of his grievance.
3. Pursuant to notice, the opposite parties have appeared and filed the written reply pleading that Pradeep Kumar Rajgharia was allotee of Plot No.477, but the installments were not paid by the original allotee. The original alottee transferred the rights of the said plot in favour of the complainant. A demand of Rs.308854/- was raised on 05.10.2006, but the payment was not made by either the original allottee or the complainant so reminders were sent, but he failed to pay the said amount intentionally. The booking of the complainant was rightly cancelled by the OP/company and OP further denied all the other allegations of the complainant praying for the dismissal of the complaint. However, the learned District Forum rejected the pleas raised by the OPs and accepted the complaint vide order dated 28.01.2014 granting the aforesaid relief. 
4. Against the impugned order, the OPs/appellant has filed appeal before us reiterating their pleas as raised before the District Forum. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record. During the course of hearing of this appeal, it transpired that the OPs have been in touch with the complainant and have been communicating in writing with regard to the present dispute and the compliance of the impugned order dated 28.01.2014. In the letter dated 05.03.2014 and the letter dated 19.10.2016, the OPs showed their inclination to settle the matter by offering him possession of the plot in question. Both these letters have been produced before us by the complainant, relevant portions whereof as reproduced as under:-

Letter dated 05.03.2014

  “Further, we are directed to accept the breaking installments alongwith interest @12% p.a. from you to issue possession Letter of the aforesaid Plot. In consonance to the Order of the Hon’ble Forum, we would like to inform you that a sum of Rs.7,60,505/- towards installment and a sum of Rs.5,66,306/- towards interest calculated @12% per annum is due to be paid by your good self so as to offer possession of the aforesaid plot in your favour”.

Letter dated 19.10.2016

“It gives us great pleasure to offer your possession of the said plot for conducting of necessary pre-develo9pment survey upon compliance of necessary formalities including payment of balance sale consideration as stated in the Statement of Account annexed as Annexure-A to this Letter within 15 days from the date of this letter. Upon receiving the full and final payment, and after compliance of other formalities, the physical possession of aforesaid plot will be handed over to you after execution and registration of Sale/ conveyance deed of the said plot in your favour”.

5. In view of the aforesaid two communications from the appellants, subsequent to the filing of the appeal and during the pendency we find that it will be in the interest of justice that the appeal is disposed of without any further directions, leaving the parties to settle at their own end. 
6. The statutory amount of Rs.8,000/- deposited at the time of filing the appeal be refunded to the appellant against proper receipt and identification in accordance with rules.

 

January 19th, 2017

Mrs.Urvashi Agnihotri, Member, Addl.Bench

R.K.Bishnoi, Judicial Member Addl.Bench

 

R.K.