BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,
ERNAKULAM.
Date of filing : 02/07/2011
Date of Order : 29/09/2011
Present :-
Shri. A. Rajesh, President.
Shri. Paul Gomez, Member.
Smt. C.K. Lekhamma, Member.
C.C. No. 350/2011
Between
Boben Thankachan Thomas, | :: | Complainant |
Tabbor Bunglow, Vakayar. P.O., Pathanamthitta District, Pin – 689 698. |
| (By Adv. Varghese M. Easo, M/s. Varghese & Jacob Advocates, Puthoor, Near KSRTC Bus Stand, Mahakavi Bharathiyar Road, Ernakulam) |
And
M/s. Apple A Day properties Pvt. Ltd., | :: | Opposite party |
Apple Tower, N.H. Bye Pass, Palarivattom, Edappally Post, Cochin – 24. |
| (Ex-parte) |
O R D E R
Paul Gomez, Member.
1. The back ground facts of the complaint are as follows :
The complainant a non-resident Indian, booked an apartment in the building complex by name 'Apple New Cochin' in January 2008. According to the promise, the apartment was to be handed over to the complainant after completion in a period of 18 months, since the date of agreement. He paid a sum of Rs. 3,52,500/- (Rupees Three lakhs fifty two thousand and five hundred only) towards the 1st instalment of the cost. When he visited the project in December 2010, the work was nowhere near completion. Being disappointed by the inertia on the part of the opposite party in pursuing with the project, the complainant issued a letter to them demanding refund of the amount paid by him with interest. A reply is still awaited. Hence this complaint making several prayers.
2. No version has been filed by the opposite party upon notice. The opposite party was set ex-parte.
3. The Power of attorney holder of the complainant was examined as PW1. Exts. A1 to A5 were marked on the side of the complainant. Argument notes were filed and his learned counsel was heard.
4. The short points for determination are :-
Whether the complainant is entitled to return of the amount paid?
Any other reliefs, if any?
5. Point No. i. :- The complaint reflect the disappointment, disgust and dejection of a young non-resident Indian who was cheated by the opposite party by promising him to complete his dream home within a short span of eighteen months. This complaint is filed to vindicate his rights arising out of the documented dream painted by Mr. Saju. K.A., Managing Director of the opposite party company, when he issued Ext. A2 allotment letter to the complainant. Exts. A3 and A4 receipts would show that the complainant had remitted Rs. 3,52,500/- (Rupees three lakhs fifty two thousand and five hundred) as part of the cost of construction. When he visited the project site in December 2010, he realized to his dismay that his dream to have an abode of his own in the vicinity of Cochin was only a writing on water. Feeling aggrieved, he forwarded a letter asking the opposite parties to return the money. That request also, fell in deaf ears. In the absence of any denial of the aforesaid averments, the only conclusion that be reached is that what has been stated by the complainant is true. The documents are also eloquent to tell us about the veracity of the transaction. The only question that remains unanswered is whether the project has been completed and handed over and if it is so, is there any fault on the part of the complainant in contributing for the same. Ext. A5 letter remains unanswered coupled with the deliberate abstention of the opposite party from the Forum would lead us to infer that the averments made are not without merit. In that view of the matter, the conclusion is inescapable that the complainant must succeed in this legal proceedings.
6. Point No. ii. :- The next point is as to the reliefs that can be allowed to the complainant. We have come to the conclusion that Rs. 3,52,500/- has been remitted by the complainant. It is quite perceptible the sentiments of a young man, when he comes to realize that his dreams regarding a residence have been shattered by the cruel act of cheating committed by the opposite party. To assuage his sentiments of agony and pain, he deserves compensation. In Ext. A2 allotment letter, it was promised that the opposite party would be paying rent @ Rs. 12,000/- per month in case the opposite party was unable to hand over the key of the apartment from 18 months from the date of inception of the contract. Whereas the complainant himself has admitted that he has not paid anything more than those specified in Exts. A3 and A4, we do not think he is entitled for the promised rent. Any how, the complainant is entitled for interest from the date of this order. He is also entitled for the costs of the proceedings in the sum of Rs. 1,000/-.
7. In short, we allow the complaint as follows :
The opposite party shall refund Rs. 3,52,500/- (Rupees Three lakhs fifty two thousand and five hundred only) to the complainant along with interest @ 12% p.a. from the date of this complaint till realisation.
The opposite party shall pay Rs. 1,000/- towards costs of the proceedings.
The order shall be complied with, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
Pronounced in open Forum on this the 29th day of September 2011.
Sd/- Paul Gomez, Member. Sd/- A. Rajesh,President. Sd/- C.K. Lekhamma, Member.
Forwarded/By Order,
Senior Superintendent.
A P P E N D I X
Complainant's Exhibits :-
Exhibit A1 | :: | Power of Attorney of the complainant |
“ A2 | :: | Allotment letter issued by the op.pty |
“ A3 | :: | An adhoc receipt dt. 29-08-2008 |
“ A4 | :: | An adhoc receipt dt. 04-10-2008 |
“ A5 | :: | A coy of the letter dt. 30-01-2011 |
Opposite party's Exhibits :: Nil
Depositions :- | | |
PW1 | :: | Jubin Eapen – complainant. |
=========
Date of Despatch of this Order ::
By Post ::
By Hand ::