BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES

REDRESSAL FORUM, JALANDHAR.

 Complaint No.494 of 2018

      Date of Instt. 03.12.2018

      Date of Decision: 02.12.2019

Geetika M Grover w/o Sh. Manoj Grover resident of 425, Housing Board Colony, Urban Estate Phase-1, Jalandhar.

..........Complainant

Versus

Jalandhar Improvement Trust, Jalandhar through its Chairman.

….….. Opposite Party

Complaint Under the Consumer Protection Act.

Before:        Sh. Karnail Singh           (President)

Smt. Jyotsna                   (Member)

Present:       Sh. Ashok Sharma, Adv Counsel for the Complainant.

Sh. M. S. Sood, Adv Counsel for the OP.

Order

Karnail Singh (President)

1.                This complaint has been filed by the complainant, wherein alleged that complainant had earlier applied for a LIG Flat under 51.5 Acre Development Scheme (Bibi Bhani Complex), Guru Amar Dass Nagar Jalandhar with the OP. The complainant got a flat in the Lucky Draw on 16.08.2009 and the complainant has been allotted LIG Flat No.5-A at Ground Floor, vide letter No.8073 dated 28.01.2010, which was issued by the OP. the total sale consideration of the plot was Rs.6,01,800/-. The complainant had deposited the full amount with the Op and the OP had even executed an agreement for sale on 20.09.2012 with the complainant after receiving the full and final payment. That the possession of the flat has not been delivered to the complainant ever after six years of execution of agreement for sale and after receiving the full and final payments of the flat. The complainant has requested the OP for the delivery of the possession of the flat as per the agreement. But the OP lingered on the matter on one pretext or the other. The OP told the complainant that the possession of the flat will be given him at the earlier but till date the possession of the flat has not been delivered to the complainant. The complainant has paid the installments to the OP from her hard earnings but the OP has cheated and defrauded the complainant by not giving her the possession of the flat. The OP had caused mental tension and agony and discomfort and harassment to the complainant. The act and conduct of the OP is absolutely a deficiency in service and unfair trade practice and as such, the instant complaint filed by the complainant with the prayer that the complaint of the complainant may be accepted and OP be directed to give the possession of the Flat No.5-A or to refund the price of the Flat i.e. Rs.6,01,800/- along with interest @ 18% p.a. from the date of deposit till realization and further, OP be directed to pay compensation to the complainant for causing mental harassment and agony, to the tune of Rs.1,00,000/- and OP be also directed to pay litigation expenses of Rs.10,000/-.

2.                Notice of the complaint was given to the OP, who filed reply and contested the complaint by taking preliminary objections that the present complaint is hopelessly time barred under the provision of Limitation Act and hence, liable to be dismissed on this score only. It is further averred that the complainant is guilty of laches and delay, hence the same is liable to be dismissed and further alleged that the present complaint is not maintainable as there is no deficiency in housing service by the answering OP. It is further alleged that the complainant is not a consumer and the OP challenges the very admission of the complaint by this Forum and further alleged that the complainant has not come to the Forum with clean hands and has concealed non payment of dues as per contract, towards sale consideration. On merits, it is admitted that the flat in question has been allotted to the complainant and complainant has also deposited the entire price of the flat, but the other allegations as made in the complaint are categorically denied and lastly prayed that the complaint of the complainant is without merits, the same may be dismissed.

3.                Rejoinder not filed.

4.                In order to prove their respective assertions, both the parties placed on the file their respective documents.

5.                We bestowed our thoughtful consideration to the submissions made by learned counsel for the respective parties and also gone through the case file very minutely.

6.                After taking into consideration the respective submission of both the counsel for the parties, we find that the dispute between the parties is only whether the possession of the flat in question is delayed for negligence of the OP or not. The other facts in regard to allotment of the LIG Flat 5-A, Ground Floor, LIG Flat under 51.5 Acre Development Scheme, Bibi Bhani Complex, Guru Amar Dass Nagar, Jalandhar is admittedly allotted to the complainant, vide allotment letter Ex.C-1 dated 28.01.2010. The complainant alleged that as per allotment letter, the OP has to complete the construction work within 2½ years and thereafter, handed over the possession to the allottee complete in all respect i.e. alongwith amenities and ultra-modern facilities with quality of standard construction. The construction work of the flat was agreed to be completed within stipulated period as enumerated in Clause-7 of the allotment letter Ex.C-1, but in this case, the OP has not delivered the possession of the same to the complainant till today. No doubt, the OP has not sent any letter to the complainant for taking possession of the flat. In this case, the complainant has established on the file that since a day of allotment of letter i.e. 28.01.2010, the OP has miserably failed to complete the construction within a stipulated period of 2½ years. It is pertinent to make clear here that the complainant has already deposited the entire price money of the said flat, if so, then the complainant is legally entitled to get the possession of the flat and live therein to enjoy the feeling of his own home, but from that facility, the complainant was deprived by the OP for long time. Even during the pendency of this complaint, the OP has not brought on the file any cogent and convincing evidence except one affidavit of Surinder Kumari, Executive Officer of JIT, whereby the OP can establish that the construction work of the flat has been already completed and the same is fit for delivery to the complainant. So, in the absence of this type of evidence from the side of the OP, itself shows that the flat in question are still not ready and inhabitable for human being and due to that reason, the actually and physical possession has not been given by the OP to the complainant, which is clear cut deficiency and negligence on the part of the OP and as such, we are of the opinion that after waiting a long time, the complainant became frustrated and demanded the return of the money along with interest, compensation and litigation expenses.

7.                We find there are much substances in the argument of learned counsel for the complainant as the OP failed to deliver the possession for a such long time, therefore, we are of the considered opinion that the complainant is entitled for the relief claimed and accordingly, the complaint of the complainant is partly accepted and OP is directed to refund the price of the flat i.e. Rs.6,01,800/- along with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of deposits, till realization and further, OP is directed to pay a compensation to the complainant for mental agony and harassment caused to the complainant, to the tune of Rs.50,000/- and further directed to pay litigation expenses of Rs.5000/-. The entire compliance be made within one month from the date of receipt of the copy of order. This complaint could not be decided within stipulated time frame due to rush of work.

8.                Copies of the order be supplied to the parties free of cost, as per Rules. File be indexed and consigned to the record room.

Dated                                       Jyotsna                           Karnail Singh

02.12.2019                                        Member                          President