Haryana

Yamunanagar

CC/10/2012

Sukhjit Singh S/o Manohar Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/S Ansal Properties & Infrastructure Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Mukesh Sehgal

05 Apr 2017

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, YAMUNA   NAGAR

                                                                                         Complaint No. 10  of  2012.

                                                                                         Date of institution: 02.01.2012

                                                                                         Date of decision: 05.04.2017

Sukhjit Singh son of Sh. Manohar Singh r/o H. No. 162/163 Vikas Nagar, Yamuna Nagar, Tehsil Jagadhri, District Yamuna Nagar.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         

                                                                                                                                   …Complainant.

                                    Versus

 

M/s Ansal Properties & Infrastructures Limited, 115, Ansal Bhawan, 16, Kasturba Gandhi Marg, New Delhi-110 001. Also having site office at SCO-136, Sector-17, Commercial Belt Jagadhri, Tehsil Jagadhri, Distt. Yamuna Nagar.                                                                                                                                       

                                                                                                                                   … Respondent.

 

BEFORE        SH. ASHOK KUMAR GARG, PRESIDENT

                        SH. S.C.SHARMA, MEMBER.

 

Present: Sh. Mukesh Sehgal, Advocate, counsel for complainant.   

              Sh. Yashpal Rajheri, Advocate, counsel for respondent  

 

ORDER

 

1.                     Complainant Sukhjit Singh has filed this complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986.

2.                     Brief facts of the present complaint, as alleged by the complainant, are that respondent (hereinafter respondent will be referred as OP) promoted a scheme of allotment of residential plot for which, the OP have purchased sizeable parcel of land situated in the Revenue Estate of Village Ratauli, Hasanpur and Kheri Rangran, Tehsil Jagadhri, District Yamuna Nagar. It was also claimed by the OP that Director, town & Country Planning has granted license for the purpose of development on the said land and integral residential township in terms of the said license and in accordance with the provisions of HUDA Act, 1975 and Rules 1996 treatment thereunder. The said integral residential township was floated under the name of ‘Sushant City, Yamuna Nagar’. Three different sizes of plots was advertised by the OP measuring 200 sq. yards, 250 sq. yards and 350 sq. yards. The complainant and his wife approached the OP for purchase of plot measuring 209 sq. meters i.e. 250 sq. yards in the said Sushant City on 16.07.2008 and paid the required booking amount of Rs. 1,20,000/- ( Rs. 70,000/- + 50,000/-). At the time of booking of the plot neither any agreement was confirmed nor any copy of agreement was provided to the complainant. Only in May 2011, the complainant was provided with agreement which was signed wherein the schedule of the payment was mentioned. The inspection of the site would reveal that no development has taken place in the terms of lying down of roads and its connectivity with the main road lying down of the sewer line and it’s joining with the main sewer line in the integrated township nor any water drain is in place as on today. The complainant in pursuant to the signing of agreement has paid his second installment on 12.01.2009 of Rs. 1,20,000/-. After that, complainant was in receipt of a notice dated 20.08.2011 from the OP which was termed as cancellation notice and the complainant demanded to pay Rs. 3,39,921/- alongwith interest at the rate of 24% per annum compounding within six (6) months from the date of notice failing which the allotment/booking of the plot by the complainant shall stand cancelled. It is not out of place to mention that interest as on 30.08.2011 was calculated at Rs. 3,39,921/-. The complainant had approached the OP for depositing the balance installments but the OP has refused to accept the same and has asked to deposit the installments alongwith interest for which the complainant is not liable because the OP is deficient in service and has not been able to complete the work as per schedule in the project is far from complete. Lastly, it has been mentioned that OP has threatened to the complainant that they will cancel the allotment of the plot in case of non-deposit of the amount mentioned in the letter dated 30.08.2011. Lastly, prayed for directing the OP to rectify the deficiency in project including lying of roads, sewerage water drain etc. and also to handover the possession of the plot with due registration and also to cancel the letter dated 30.08.2011 demanding interest and cancellation of the allotment of the plot in question and also to pay compensation as well as litigation expenses.

3.                     Upon notice, OP appeared and filed its written statement by taking some preliminary objections such as complaint is an abuse of process of law; complainant has not come to this forum with clean hands and has concealed the true and material facts. The real facts are that the term and condition of the advance registration form was fulfilled, which was filled and signed by the complainant. The OP wrote a letter dated 30.08.2011 to the complainant for making the payment as per schedule otherwise the agreement would stand cancelled but the complainant did not comply with the terms and conditions of the advance registration form; the Hon’ble Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain and try the present complaint as there is no relationship of consumer exist between the parties. It is well established principle of law that the Consumer Forum cannot act as a recovery courts and on merit all the contents of the complaint were denied being wrong and incorrect. It has been further mentioned that the OP never assured to the complainant to provide any financial assistance from any financial institution, as alleged. It is own choice of the allottee to avail financial assistance at his or her own choice.   However, complainant was made available and read over and made understand each and everything regarding mode of payment, delivery of possession and other conditions which was stood printed on the application form at the time of booking. The tentative terms and conditions on which the allotment was made was also agreed upon by the complainant. The condition No.8 & 9 of the application form has been mentioned in the reply. Lastly, it has been stated that the complainant has committed breach in compliance of terms and conditions by not making the payment as per schedule and rendered himself defaulter. Number of call letters and reminders on different dates were sent to the complainant with request to make the payment of the outstanding dues as per payment schedule but the complainant never adhered to act upon those call letters and filed the present false complaint. Lastly, prayed for dismissal of complaint.

4.                     Complainant failed to adduce any evidence, hence evidence of the complainant was closed by court order dated 18.05.2016.

5.                     On the other hand, learned counsel for the OP tendered into evidence photo copy of receipt of Rs. 50,000/- and Rs. 70,000/- dated 16.07.2008 as Annexure R-1 and R-2, Photo copy of receipt of amounting to Rs. 1,20,000/- dated 12.06.2009 as Annexure R-3, Photo copy of cancellation notice dated 30.08.2011 as Annexure R-4, photo copy of order/judgment of Hon’ble State Commission, Haryana passed on 04.08.2011 as Annexure R-5, Photo copy of order of previous complaint filed by the complainant before State Commission as Annexure R-6 and closed the evidence on behalf of OP.  

6.                     We have heard the learned counsel for both the parties and have gone through the pleadings as well as documents placed on file very minutely and carefully. 

7.                     It is not disputed that complainant alongwith his wife Harvinder Kaur purchased one plot measuring 250 Sq. yard in the residential township namely Sushant City, Yamuna Nagar on 16.07.2008  from the OP and paid the required booking amount of Rs. 1,20,000/- (Rs 70,000+50,000/-) which is duly evident from the copy of receipts Annexure R-1 and R-2. It is also not disputed that complainant deposited second installment of Rs. 1,20,000/- with the OP which is also duly evident from Annexure R-3.

8.                     The only version of the complainant is that the OP has failed to develop the area i.e. roads and its connectivity with the main roads, sewerage lines and storm water drain and has wrongly and illegally issued a demand notice to pay Rs. 3,39,921/- alongwith interest at the rate of 20% per annum but this plea of the complainant is not tenable as the complainant has totally failed to place on file any cogent evidence in support of his case or facts mentioned in the complaint. The present complaint pertains to January 2012 but the complainant failed to adduce any evidence till his evidence was closed by court order on dated 18.05.2016. Even, the complainant has not filed any application for appointment of any Local Commissioner to ascertain the exact position of the township including plot of the complainant. The version of the OP has also not been rebutted by the complainant.

9.                     Resultantly, in the circumstances noted above, we are of the considered view that there is no merit in the present complaint and the same is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs. Copies of this order be supplied to the parties concerned free of costs as per rules. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Announced: 05.04.2017.                              

                                                                                        ( ASHOK KUMAR GARG)

                                                                                  PRESIDENT

                              (S.C.SHARMA)                        DCDRF,YAMUNANAGAR

                               MEMBER