CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION – X

GOVERNMENT OF N.C.T. OF DELHI

Udyog Sadan, C – 22 & 23, Institutional Area

(Behind Qutub Hotel)

New Delhi – 110016

    Case No.142/2017

MRS. REENA JHA

W/O. MR. AJAY KUMAR JHA

R/O. HOUSE.NO. R2-1713/25,

TUGHLAKABAD EXTENSION,

NEW DELHI-110019.                                                 …..COMPLAINANT

Vs.   

1. M/S. S.R.S. KATARIA BUILDERS & DEVELOPERS (P) LTD                                                                                               THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR

HAVING ITS OFFICE AT

RZ-2861/28, TUGHLAKABAD EXTENSION,

NEW DELHI-110019.

2. MR. ANIL KATARIA

MANAGING DIRECTOR

S.R.S. KATARIA BUILDERS & DEVELOPERS (P) LTD

HAVING ITS OFFICE AT

RZ-2861/28, TUGHLAKABAD EXTENSION,

NEW DELHI-110019.

EMAIL :

RESIDENT OF HOUSE NO. RZ-2693/30

TUGHLAKABAD EXTENSION,

NEW DELHI-110019.                                                    .…..OPPOSITE PARTIES

Date of Institution-13/04/2017

             Date of Order- 15/09/2022

  O R D E R

RASHMI BANSAL– Member

The present complaint is filed by complainant against OP for refund of the principal amount paid by her towards purchase of a flat, along with the compensation for mental agony and harassment and interest calculated at the rate of 24% per annum on the amount paid, Pendente Lite and future interest on the amount paid and cost of litigation.

1. The present complaint has been filed by the complainant through her authorised representative vide authority letter Ex.CW1/3. OP1 is the construction company, OP2 is the managing director of OP1, and OP3 is the owner of the property upon which  flats were to be built under a collaboration agreement  entered between OP1,2 and 3. are builder It is the case of the complainant that she entered into a contractual understanding with OP 1, 2 and 3, whereby the OP1 assured the complainant, that in furtherance to a collaboration agreement entered into between OP1 and OP3,  for the purpose of construction of the flats on property of OP 3 and proposed for building of few flats for sale and purchase, were proposed to be constructed on ground, 1^st, 2^nd, 3^rd and 4^th floor. It is stated that being owner of the property, the OP3 agreed to take possession of the proposed flats situated on ground and first floor and OP1 had to take possession of the flats on 2^nd, 3^rd and 4^th floor, out of which 3^rd floor was purchased by the complainant from the OPs for a total construction of Rs. 7,25,000 out of which complainant has paid a total amount of Rs. 3,65,000 till 9^th March 2015. The possession of the proposed flat was due on 31^st March 2015. The total amount paid by the complainant is Rs.3,64,900/- against receipts, CW1/2 (colly), as issued by OPs in the following manner,

1.  Rs.26,000 in cash and
2. Rs.78,900 in cheque against receipt, advance money slip dated ——, issued by OP 2 the MD, of OP1.
3. Rs.1,00,000 vide receipt number 553 issued by High Tech Kataria Builders and Developers;
4. Rs. 55,000 vide receipt number 558 issued by High Tech Kataria Builders and Developers;
5. Rs.50,000 cash, no details are provided;
6. Rs.55,000 vide cheque number 181965, receipt without any bearing stamp of Anil Kataria and no details;

2. Complainant submitted that the OPs have continuously assured time and again that the possession of the flat shall be handed over to the  Complainant on or before 31^st March 2015 and on their assurance she paid an amount as per linter wise schedule of payment and has not defaulted even for a day as and when payment was raised and till March 2015, she has paid more than half of the total sale consideration, however, the OPs have only built ground and first floor of the house and only OP3 has been enjoying the  property. On inquiry from OP2 and OP3 about the possession of the flat booked by her, she was informed byOP2 and OP3 that they are constructing 2^ndand 3^rd floor of the house and as soon as the construction of 3^rd floor is complete the possession shall be handed over to complaint. The complainant noticed no development in the construction work, therefore, upon more inquiry she was informed by OP2 and OP3 in July 2015 that due to the low market condition, OPs are not in position to further develop the property and assured the complainant that the amount deposited by her shall be refunded to her with interest @24% p.a. This is the allegation of the complainant that even till date OP have not given the possession of the flat nor the amount has been refunded to the complainant. Complainant submits that because of the misrepresentation on part of the OPs, she has suffered huge financial losses and have undergone tremendous mental agony and stated that there is gross negligence and given deficiency of service is on the part of OPs and they are guilty of unfair trade practices which cost loss of money, mental harassment and agony to the complainant and therefore OP is liable to compensate the complainant. This is further submission of the complainant that delay in delivery the possession of the flat is resulted in direct financial loss to the complainant, therefore, OPs are liable to compensate the complainant of the unwarranted and unwanted inconvenience, inadequacy in the quality, nature and manner of performance and therefore, they are guilty of deficiency in services.

3. Upon service OP3 refused to receive the summons which was considered as a proper service upon him and as such was proceeded Ex-parte on 26^th may 2017.

4. OP1 and OP2 were proceeded Ex-parte on 20.09.2018, as notice was returned back with remarks ‘left without address’. Since the complainant does not know any fresh address of OP1 and OP2, therefore, they were proceeded Ex-parte.

5. The complainant has filed her Ex-parte evidence and written arguments.

6. We carefully have gone through the documents available on record, and this is found that there was no formal agreement for sale was drawn between complainant and OP.CW1/1 dated 12.12.204 is the advance money slip / receipt confirming payment of Rs.1,05,000/- at the letter head of OP1, duly signed by OP2, containing schedule of payment and terms and conditions of the handing over the possession by 31.03.2015. The CW1/2 (colly)  shows a payment of Rs 1,00,000/- but made in favour of one High Tech Kataria Builders and Developers, with revenue stamp on it, and a payment of Rs. 55,000/-  made to the above stated Builders and Developers, bearing receipt number 558 who are not made a party to the present complaint. A payment of Rs. 50,000/- was made in cash against which no formal receipt was issued and on a blank paper, only mentioning ‘cash received 50,000/-’ bears revenue stamp. The details of the payment of Rs. 55,000/- vide cheque number 181965, dated 17.03.2015,are mentioned on a blank paper, with revenue stamp on it and rubber stamp of the name ‘Anil Kataria’. Complainant has also not placed on record the collaboration agreement as mentioned by her entered into between OP1 and OP3. She did not place on record any document/ agreement to show the contractual relationship entered with OP1, 2 and 3. There is also no document to show the OP’s assurance for the refund of amount with interest @24% p.a. Complainant also not placed any evidence on record to show that OP3 has got the ground floor and first floor in furtherance of the agreement entered with complainant.

7. The facts and circumstances of the case clearly establish deficiency of services and unfair trade practice on the part of OPs, however, in the absence of the sufficient evidence on record by the complainant, this Commission is constraints to allow the recovery of only Rs.1,05,000/-against which the receipt CW 1/1was issued by OP1 and OP2. Therefore, OP1 and OP2 are directed to refund to the complainant the above stated amount from the date of filing of the complaint till actual realization along with interest at the rate of 10% per annum, a compensation of  Rs. 50,000/-  towards deficient services and unfair trade practice and causing mental agony, harassment and financial loss to the complainant and an amount of Rs.30,000/-  towards the litigation cost. The above order may be complied with within 3 months from the date of order failing which the entire amount shall carry an interest at the rate of 18% per annum till its actual realization.

8. The file be consigned to record room after providing copy of the order to parties free of cost in terms of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

9. The consumer complainant could not be decided within statutory period due to heavy pendency of the court cases.

10. The order be updated on website www.confonet.nic.in

11. The order contains 6 pages and bears my signature on each page.

(Dr. RAJENDER DHAR)             (RASHMI BANSAL)      (MONIKA SRIVASTAVA)

           MEMBER                      MEMBER                      PRESIDENT