BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, AMRITSAR.
Consumer Complaint No. 266 of 2015
Date of Institution: 28.4.2015
Date of Decision: 29.4.2016
- Mr. Parminder Singh S/o S.Roop Singh 2) Mr.Kultar Singh S/o S.parminder Singh Grover R/o 240/5, Vijay Nagar, Batala Road, Amritsar aged 56 years
Complainants
Versus
Impact Sare Magnum Townships Pvt.Ltd, having its Branch Office at P.O.Vallah, G.T. Road Bypass,Amritsar through its Chairman/Managing Director/Principal Officer
Opposite Party
Complaint under sections 12 & 13 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986
Present: For the Complainants : Sh.Deepinder Singh,Adv.
For the Opposite Party : Sh.S.M.Vermani,Advocate
Coram
Sh.S.S.Panesar, President
Ms.Kulwant Kaur Bajwa, Member
Sh.Anoop Sharma,Member
Order dictated by:
Sh.S.S. Panesar, President.
1. Parminder Singh & Kultar Singh, complainants have brought the instant complaint under section 12 & 13 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 on the allegations that complainants are father-son and they have booked one plot with opposite party, who is developer and colonizer at Crescent Parc-Ashberry Homes, Amritsar. The complainants are consumers of opposite party and are competent to invoke the jurisdiction of this Forum. Opposite party while getting booked the plot in the said development project by the complainant for around 300 square yards @ 9995/-square yards took Rs. 7 lacs from the complainant on 23.1.2012. The balance amount was to be payable in installments which the complainants were always ready and willing to pay. As per the tall promises made by the opposite party regarding the said project, the opposite party failed to provide the basic amenities to the complainant. The complainant kept on visiting the opposite party regularly for development of the project and to take the balance payment and get the plot registered in their favour and further gave the possession thereof. Opposite party failed to take any step to develop the project and ultimately opposite party told the complainant that they could take the refund of their amount as opposite party is not in a position to develop the project or handover the possession of the plot. The opposite party got blank application form signed from the complainant and even then the amount was not refunded with interest. The complainant again wrote a letter to opposite party on 5.12.2014 which was duly acknowledged by the opposite party. Ultimately the opposite party refunded a sum of Rs. 6,90,000/- vide one cheque dated 20.2.2015 from the amount of Rs. 7 lacs paid by the complainant. No interest was paid , rather the amount of Rs. 10000/- was also deducted without any reason. Therefore, the aforesaid act of the opposite party in not developing the town and later opted for refund of the deposited amount and that too was not fully paid back is an act of deficiency in service, unfair trade practice and mal-practice. The complainant is entitled for compensation to the tune of Rs. 4,50,000/- from the opposite party. The complainant has prayed for the following reliefs against the opposite party:-
a) The opposite party be directed to pay the balance amount of Rs. 10000/- and pay interest @ 12% p.a on Rs. 7 lac from the date of payment till date of refund.
b) The opposite party be directed to pay compensation of Rs. 4,50,000/- to the complainants.
c) The opposite party be directed to pay the adequate cost of the litigation.
Hence, this complaint.
2. Upon notice, opposite party appeared through counsel and filed written reply contesting the claim of the complainant taking certain preliminary objections therein inter alia that the complainants are guilty of suppression of material facts as well as actual state of affairs from this Forum. The complainants have not approached this Forum with clean hands and therefore, they are not entitled to any relief. It is stated that the complainants applied for plot bearing No. 12, total area 299.53 sq.yards in the colony of M/s. Impact Sare Magnum Township Pvt.Limited and as a sequel thereto make a booking payment of Rs. 7 lacs. The complainants thereafter were to fill application and also to execute plot buyer agreement as per policy of the company. Thereafter, the complainants were required to make payment as per terms and conditions as laid down in the application form. But the complainants did not come forward to complete the formalities and execute application for plot buyer agreement. Actually the complainants purchased the said plot for speculative purpose with a motive to sell the same for profit but as the reality market were not favorable for the last 2-3 years, so the complainants could not get suitable buyer and coined the false story as narrated in the complaint. As a matter of fact the said colony Crescent Park is fully developed within 2-5 years and a number of persons/buyers have taken possession in the said colony. The complainants approached the opposite party and requested it to refund the amount deposited with them as they had no ready money to pay the balance sale consideration. They further told that despite repeated requests they have failed to find a suitable buyer for the plot. The amount of Rs. 7 lacs was deposited by the complainant on 23.1.2012 and by law of limitation and suit to claim the refund of the said amount is hit by limitation ; That the complainants have received the entire money back from the opposite party after giving sown affidavit and now they are not the consumers of opposite party under the provisions of law. On merits, facts narrated in the complaint have specifically denied and a prayer for dismissal of the complaint with cost was made.
3. In their bid to prove the case Deepinder Singh,Adv.counsel for the complainant tendered into evidence affidavit of complainant Parminder Singh Ex.C-1, copy of registered letter Ex.C-2, copy of reminder Ex.C-3, copy of payment cheque Ex.C-4 and copy of allotment letter Ex.C-5 and closed evidence on behalf of the complainant.
4. On the other hand Sh.S.M.Vermani,Adv.counsel for the opposite party tendered into evidence affidavit of Sh.Ajay Singh Cheema,Director Ex.OP1, copy of specimen application for allotment of plot Ex.OP2, copy of specimen copy of plot buyer agreement Ex.OP3, copy of affidavit of Parminder Singh and Kultar Singh Ex.OP4, copy of letter written by Parminder Singh to the opposite party Ex.OP5, copy of letter written by Kultar Singh to opposite party Ex.OP6 and closed the evidence on behalf of the opposite party.
5. We have heard the ld.counsel for the parties and have carefully gone through the record on the file.
6. From the appreciation of the evidence on record, it becomes evident that on 23.1.2012, complainants booked plot in the development project namely Crescent Parc-Ashberry Homes, Amritsar measuring 300 square yards @ 9995/- square yards with the opposite party. It was agreed between the parties that balance amount shall be paid in different installments. It is the case of the complainants that they were always ready and willing to pay the balance amount. It is further the case of the complainants that the colony could not be developed by the opposite party despite making several requests to the opposite party. Ultimately the complainants applied for refund the amount/earnest money of Rs. 7 lacs. The opposite party refunded a sum of Rs.6,90,000/- only which amounted to a part payment. The contention of the opposite party that the entire amount due payable has already been refunded to the complainant, is not tenable because no certificate regarding full and final payment was received by the opposite party from the complainant. As such the alleged payment of Rs. 6,90,000/- made on 20.2.2015 vide cheque , copy whereof is Ex.C-4 amounts to part payment only. The contention that the relationship of consumer and service provider interse parties have snapped out on receipt of Rs. 6,90,000/- vide cheque dated 20.2.2015, has no legal force because the payment has been made partly. Therefore, the relationship of consumer and service provider interse parties subsists until full clearance is made by the opposite party. As such complaint succeeds and opposite party is directed to refund the amount of Rs. 10000/- to the complainant alongwith compensation to the tune of Rs. 5000/- . Cost of litigation are assessed at Rs. 2000/-. If the compliance of this order is not made within 30 days of the receipt of the copy of the order , the amount awarded shall carry interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of order until full and final recovery. Copies of the orders be furnished to the parties free of costs. File is ordered to be consigned to the record room. Case could not be disposed of within the stipulated period due to heavy pendency of the cases in this Forum.
Announced in Open Forum
Dated : 29.04.2016
/R/ ( S.S.Panesar )
President
( Kulwant Kaur Bajwa) (Anoop Sharma)
Member Member
