COMPLAINTS FILED ON:13.06.2012
DISPOSED ON:30.07.2012.
BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM AT BANGALORE (URBAN)
30th DAY OF JULY-2012
PRESENT:- SRI. B.S. REDDY PRESIDENT
SRI.A.MUNIYAPPA MEMBER
COMPLAINT Nos.1191/2012
Complainant | Shobha W/o N.Jajen Rao, Aged about 38 years, C/o Manohar, No.578, 90th Cross, I Stage, Kumaraswamy Layout, Bangalore-560 078. Adv:Sri.Shankar B.L., V/s |
OPPOSITE PARTY | Mr.Bhaskar Reddy S/o Mr.Venkat Reddy, Aged about 47 years, No.0/1, 4th Main Road, Kuvempu Nagar, Doddakallasandra, Bangalore. Also at: No.A-10, 504, Eliba Puva”, 7th Stage, Near Brigade Millennium Apartments, J.P.Nagar, Bangalore-560 078. Ex-parte. |
O R D E R
SRI. B.S.REDDY, PRESIDENT
The complainant filed this complaint Under Section-12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 seeking direction against the Opposite Party (herein after called as O.P) to refund advance sale consideration of Rs.3,90,000/- with interest at 24% p.a. and pay damages of Rs.1,00,000/- on the allegations of deficiency in service.
2. In spite of service of notice, OP failed to appear without any justifiable cause, hence paced ex-parte.
3.The complainant in order to substantiate complaint averments, filed affidavit evidence.
4. Arguments heard from complainant’s side.
5. We have gone through the complaint averments, the documents produced and affidavit evidence of the complainant. On the basis of these records it becomes clear that the complainant intended to purchase a residential site in the layout known as “New Citi”, situated at Abbanakuppe Village, Ittamadu Village, Bidadi Hobli, Ramanagaram Taluk, Bangalore Rural District and paid initial sale consideration of Rs.1,90,000/- as an advance through cheques dt.20.12.2006 and 29.12.2006 to the OP. OP has issued the receipts and executed the agreement deed n 05.01.2007 incorporating the terms and conditions. The complainant was always ready and willing to pay the balance sale consideration and get the sale deeds registered. OP failed to form the layout and allot the sites as assured. The complainant got issued notice but Op has not replied for the same, ultimately the complainant demanded for amount paid and OP promised to refund the advance within a month and issued cheques towards refund of the amount but the cheques were returned as “Funds Insufficient”.
Further the complainant claims that Ops running an investment company in the name and style of “Royal County” and the complainant invested a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- on different dates in the year 2008 in the said Company. OP assured to invest the said amount in real estate business and he would distribute the profit amount amongst shareholders has not paid the profit or interest amount. The complainant demanded for refund of the said amount but OP has not refunded the same. The receipts issued by OP dt.11.01.2008 reveals that an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- has been received from one Prema Bai and another receipt dt.08.06.2008 issued for having receiving sum of Rs.1,00,000/- from the complainant towards booking of site in the project Royal County. OP has issued the letters dt.25.01.2009 in favour of complainant undertaking to refund the amount received in respect of the project Royal County. Further OP has issued the letter dt.25.01.2009 in favour of Prema Bai undertaking to refund the amount in respect of the project Royal County. After going through these receipts and letter it becomes clear that one Prema Bai has paid the amount of Rs.1,00,000/- in respect of Royal County and the letter issued by OP relates to refund of that amount to Prema Bai. Prema Bai is not a party to the proceeding, the complainant cannot claim that amount of Rs.1,00,000/-.
6. The very fact of OP remaining ex-parte leads to draw inference that OP is admitting the claim of the complainant. There is no reason to disbelieve the unchallenged affidavit evidence of the complainant and the documents produced. The act of OP neither forming any layout and allotting the sites nor refunding the amount, amounts to deficiency in service. The complainant is entitled for refund of the amount with interest at 18% p.a. from the respective date of payments, till the date of realization along with litigation cost of Rs.2,000/- Accordingly, we proceed to pass the following:
O R D E R
The complaint filed by the complainant is allowed in part.
Op is directed to refund an amount of Rs.2,90,000/- with interest at 18% p.a. from the respective date of payments, till the date of realization and pay litigation cost of Rs.2,000/- to the complainant.
This order is to be complied within four weeks from the date of its communication.
Send copy of this order to both the parties free of costs.
(Dictated to the Stenographer and typed in the computer and transcribed by her verified and corrected, and then pronounced in the Open Court by us on this the 30th day of JULY-2012.)
MEMBER PRESIDENT
Cs.
