Haryana

Sonipat

CC/133/2015

DR. SANTOSH BANSAL W/O LATE DR. SUBHASH BANSAL - Complainant(s)

Versus

M.D. BRANCH MANAGER T.D.I. INFRASTRUCTURE LTD. - Opp.Party(s)

SURENDER DAHIYA

03 Jun 2016

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,

SONEPAT.

               

                                Complaint No.133 of 2015

                                Instituted on:21.04.2015

                                Date of order:03.06.2016

 

1.Dr Santosh Bansal wife of late Dr Subhash Bansal,

2.Ankush Bansal son of late Dr Subhash Bansal, both residents of H.No.245, Ward no.23, Sonepat at present Bansal Hospital, Kath Mandi, Sonepat.

                                           ...Complainants.

                           Versus

1.MD/Branch Manager, TDI Infrastructure Kundli, tehsil and distt. Sonepat.

2.TDI Infrastructure Lrd., Vandna Building, Tolstoy Marg, 11, Connaught Place, Vakil Mandi House, New Delhi through its MD.

                                           ...Respondents.

COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 12 OF

THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,1986

 

Argued by: Sh. Surender Malik Adv. for complainants.

           Sh. Virender Tyagi, Adv. for respondents.

    

BEFORE-    NAGENDER SINGH………………………………………………PRESIDENT.

          SMT.PRABHA WATI……………………………………………MEMBER.

O R D E R

            The complainants have filed the present complaint against the respondents alleging therein that the ownership of plot no.H-763 was transferred by one Subhash Gandhi in the name of the complainants on 27.11.2008 and they have already paid all the installments including EDC interest about Rs.19,44,086/-  to the respondents since 2009, but the respondents did not deliver possession of the plot to the complainants.  Rather they told the complainants that plot no.H-763 will not be allotted to them and some other alternative plot will be allotted to the complainants.  The complainants have requested the respondents to allot the plot no. H-763 measuring 250 Sq. yards situated at TDI, Kundli, but the respondents have refused to accept the legal and genuine request of the complainants  and that amounts to a grave deficiency in service on the part of the respondents. So, she has come to this Forum and has filed the present complaint.

2.        In reply, the respondents have submitted that the basic cost of the unit was Rs.6200/- per sq. yards excluding EDC at the rate of Rs.1662.50 paise per sq. yards and CMC, IDC, PLC etc. The respondents have denied the fact that the complainants have deposited Rs.1944086/- in the month of 1/2009. If the complainants are not interested to take possession of similar plot, the respondents are ready to allot and deliver the possession of some alternative plot in the same project.  There is no deficiency in service of any kind on the part of the respondents and the complainants are not entitled for any relief and compensation and thus, prayed for the dismissal of the present complaint.

3.        We have heard the arguments of both the ld. Counsel for the parties at length and we have also gone through the entire relevant material available on the case file carefully & minutely.

4.        Ld. Counsel for the complainant has argued his case vehemently by alleging deficiency in service on the part of the respondents that the ownership of plot no.H-763 was transferred by one Subhash Gandhi in the name of the complainants on 27.11.2008 and they have already paid all the installments including EDC interest about Rs.19,44,086/-  to the respondents since 2009, but the respondents did not deliver possession of the plot to the complainants.  Rather they told the complainants that plot no.H-763 will not be allotted to them and some other alternative plot will be allotted to the complainants.  The complainants have requested the respondents to allot the plot no. H-763 measuring 250 Sq. yards situated at TDI, Kundli, but the respondents have refused to accept the legal and genuine request of the complainants  and that amounts to a grave deficiency in service on the part of the respondents.

          On the other hand, ld. Counsel for the respondents has submitted that the basic cost of the unit was Rs.6200/- per sq. yards excluding EDC at the rate of Rs.1662.50 paise per sq. yards and CMC, IDC, PLC etc. The respondents have denied the fact that the complainants have deposited Rs.1944086/- in the month of 1/2009. If the complainants are not interested to take possession of similar plot, the respondents are ready to allot and deliver the possession of some alternative plot in the same project.  There is no deficiency in service of any kind on the part of the respondents and the complainants are not entitled for any relief and compensation and thus, prayed for the dismissal of the present complaint.

5.        After hearing the learned counsel for both the parties at length and after going through the contents of the complaint, reply filed by the respondents no.1 to 3 & 4 and evidence led by both the parties, we are of the view that there is patent deficiency in service on the part of the respondents no.1 to 3 because they have received the huge amount from the complainants and have failed to deliver the physical possession of the plot bearing no.H-763 to the complainants and the respondents are utilizing the same for their personal gain without providing any services to the complainants. 

          Ld. Counsel for the respondents has also argued his case vehemently, but we find no force in the same as the complainants have been able to prove the deficiency in service on the part of the respondents.  Thus, we hereby direct the respondents to allot any alternative plot from the plots 613 to 963 as shown in their layout plan, in place of the plot no.H-763 to the complainant.  If any amount is due towards the complainants,  the respondents are directed to accept the same from the complainants without any interest or penalty.  The respondents are further directed to compensate the complainant to the tune of Rs.10,000/- (Rs.ten thousand) for rendering deficient services, for causing unnecessary mental agony & harassment.

          With these observations, findings and directions, the present complaint stands disposed off.

          Certified copy of this order be provided to both the parties free of costs.

File be consigned to the record-room.

 

 

(Prabha Wati)                             (Nagender Singh-President)

Member DCDRF                                  DCDRF, Sonepat.

 

Announced:03.06.2016