Chandigarh

DF-I

CC/739/2021

Tripta Arora - Complainant(s)

Versus

Managing Director Citi DCFENTRE Developers (CCC) - Opp.Party(s)

In person

11 Mar 2024

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION-I,

U.T. CHANDIGARH

 

                    

Consumer Complaint No.	:	CC/739/2021
Date of Institution	:	21/10/2021
Date of Decision	:	11/3/2024

 

Smt. Tripta Arora, w/O Sh. Satish Kumar Arora, R/O H. NO. 154, SECTOR -11, Chandigarh (U.T.)

Complainant

 

V e r s u s

 

1. MANAGING DIRECTOR, CHANDIGARH CITI CENTER DIRECTOR (CCC) THROUGH ITS PARTNERS VIJAY JINDAL, VIP ROAD, ZIRAKPUR DISTRICT MOHALI 140603,

 

2. CHANDIGARH CITI CENTER (CCC) DEVELOPERS THROUGH ITS PARTNERS PANKAJ GUPTA, VIP ROAD, ZIRAKPUR, DISTRICT MOHALI 140603

.  … Opposite Parties

 

CORAM :	PAWANJIT SINGH	PRESIDENT
	SURJEET KAUR	MEMBER

                       

ARGUED BY	:	Complainant in person
	:	OP No.1 exparte.
	:	Sh. Luv Malhotra alongwith Sh. Mohamad Sartaj Khan, Advocates for OP NO.2

Per surjeet kaur, Member

     Briefly stated  the complainant on assurances of the OPs that they have every approval for their project and the project will be completed within time booked a dwelling unit office space  No.644, 6^th floor in Chandigarh City Centre, zirakpur. The total cost of the unit was Rs. 22,00,000/-  and the complainant has paid the entire amount through cheque to the tune of Rs.12.00 lakh and Rs.10.00 lakh in cash and as per agreement the OPs were paying 1% interest  on the aforesaid amount till the handing over of the possession. However, the OPs failed to execute a formal Buyer’s Agreement with the complainant. As per clause of allotment letter the possession was to be handed over within a period of 18 months from the date of start of construction  with  grace period of 6 months. It is alleged that the OPs have failed to handover the possession within the stipulated period and even stopped giving 1% interest for cash amount paid by the complainant  for last 8 months. Thus the complainant sent a representative on 15.12.2019. The complainant also visited the site and shocked to see that even the basic structure has not been completed and as such  the Ops are not in a position to hand over the possession of the unit.  When the OPs neither handed over the possession of the unit nor refunded the deposited amount the complainant sent a legal notice but no avail. Alleging the aforesaid act of Opposite Parties deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on their part, this complaint has been filed.

2. OP No.1 did not turn up despite due service, hence vide order dated 21.10.2022 it was proceeded against exparte
3. The Opposite Parties NO.2 in its reply while admitting the factual matrix of the case stated that after taking partial completion certificate/occupation certificate from the competent authorities  the complainant was offered possession vide letter dated 15.7.2019 and reminder letters were also issued to the complainant to clear the remaining dues and take the possession,  but the the complainant have not taken the possession till date. Thus the complainant cannot seek refund and at the most he can seek delay interest if any till valid offer of possession is made. As per the letter of offer of possession dated 15/07/2019 it was made clear to the complainant by the OPs to clear all the pending dues and other charges within 20 days from the date of that letter that is on or before 05/08/2019. Further it was mentioned in the said letter that in case complainant does not clear the dues and obtain the actual physical possession of the above said unit, he shall be liable to pay holding charges and this shall be in addition to interest on delayed payment. However,  despite the above said mentioning complainant did not pay the whole amount of the said unit in time and she is herself a defaulter. All other allegations made in the complaint has been  denied being wrong.
4. Rejoinder was filed and averments made in the consumer complaint were reiterated.
5. Contesting parties led evidence by way of affidavits and documents.
6. We have heard the learned counsel for the contesting parties and gone through the record of the case.
7. It is evident from record that the complainant paid an amount of Rs.12,00,000/-  to the OPs for purchase of the unit in question.  As per Agreement Annexure C-3 dated 9.10.2016  under article 2b it is clearly mentioned that  the OPs have received an amount of Rs.12,00,000/- from the complainant after giving discount of Rs.1,13,220/- as is evident from Annexure C-2.  It is also apparent from the agreement the promised date of possession was 8.10.2018 but admittedly the offer of possession was given on 15.7.2019 as is evident from Annexure C-5 (colly). As per the case of the complainant, the OPs paid assured return to her till 20.7.2019 i.e. till the date of offer of possession  and thereafter they stopped payment of assured return. The allegation of the complainant is that she  invested her hard earned money with the OPs but they did not fulfill their promises  and failed to hand over the possession of the unit complete in all respect with all amenities  after obtaining occupation/completion certificate from the competent authorities.  Though the complainant has alleged that she has paid Rs.22,00,000/-  out of which she paid Rs.10,00,000/- in cash to the OPs towards the agreed cost of Rs.22,00,000/-  for the unit in question but the complainant has utterly failed to prove on record by way of any cogent evidence in the form of receipt etc. that she paid Rs.10,00,000/- to the OPs in cash. Even otherwise also there is not even a single document showing the cost of unit as Rs.22,00,000/-. As per Annexure C-2 and C-3 the cost of the unit is Rs.12,00,000/- only.
8. Undoubtedly the complainant paid Rs.12,00,000/- out of her hard earned money to the OPs towards the sale consideration of the unit in question  and now running from pillar to post to get the refund of the same. There are various letters on record which show that the complainant sought information from the Ops regarding the completion of the project in question and the Ops have never responded to the same and as such the complainant rightly did not opt to take possession of a incomplete project without having any occupation/completion certificate.
9. Notably as per Annexure C-3  the parties got the agreement executed on 9.10.2016 and the complainant accordingly paid the total amount of Rs.12,00,000/-  there and then only.  As per Annexure C-2  dated 10.10.2016 the agreed actual cost of the unit is Rs.12,00,000/- only. Further it is an admitted fact that partial  occupation certificate was received by OPs on 13.6.2019 subject to certain conditions. In our opinion collecting money from consumers without necessary permission from the competent authorities, itself is unfair trade practice
10. Further, in case Kamal Sood Vs. DLF Universal Ltd., reported as  III(2007) CPJ-7 (NC),   the Hon’ble National Commission held that a builder should not collect money, from the prospective buyers, without obtaining the required permissions, such as zoning plan, layout plan, and schematic building plan. It is the duty of the builder, to obtain the requisite permissions or sanctions, such as sanction for construction etc., in the first instance, and, thereafter, recover the consideration money from the purchasers of the flats/building.
11.  In view of the foregoing we are of the view that certainly the Ops are deficient in rendering proper service and indulged in unfair trade practice as they after taking huge money from the complainant failed to handover possession of the unit in question  complete in all respect after obtaining occupation/completion certificate from the competent authorities.  Thus the complaint is liable to be allowed.
12. In view of the above discussion, the present consumer complaint succeeds and the same is accordingly allowed. OPs are directed as under:-

1. to refund Rs.12,00,000/- to the complainant with interest @9% P.A.from the date of offer of possession i.e. 15.7.2019 till onwards.
2. to pay Rs.40,000/- to the complainant as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment to him;
3. to pay Rs.10,000/- to the complainant as costs of litigation.

13.      This order be complied with by the OPs within 45 days from the date of receipt of its certified copy, failing which, they shall make the payment of the amounts mentioned at Sr.No.(i) & (ii) above, with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of this order, till realization, apart from compliance of direction at Sr.No.(iii) above.
14. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stands disposed off.
15.      Certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge. The file be consigned.

			sd/- [Pawanjit Singh]
			President
			Sd/-
			[Surjeet Kaur] Member
11/3/2024