DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, GURGAON-122001.
Consumer Complaint No: 122 of 2014 Date of Institution: 29.04.2014 Date of Decision: 14.12.2015.
Udai Chand Kaushik s/o Sh. Bhagwat Dayal, R/o Ravi Nagar, Gurgaon, Haryana.
……Complainant.
Versus
- M/s Arun Dev Builders Ltd, F-1211, C.R.Park, New Delhi-110019.
- M/s Arun Dev Builders, 209/13, Subhash Nagar, Gurgaon.
..Opposite parties
Complaint under Sections 12 & 14 of Consumer Protection Act,1986
BEFORE: SH.SUBHASH GOYAL, PRESIDENT.
SMT JYOTI SIWACH, MEMBER
SH.SURENDER SINGH BALYAN, MEMBER.
Present: Shri Udai Chand Kaushik, complainant in person
Sh. Sanjeev Kumar Raghav, Adv for the OPs
ORDER SUBHASH GOYAL, PRESIDENT.
The case of the complainant, in brief, is that he booked flat vide Registration No.62865 measuring 1191 sq. ft in the project of the OP-1 “Dev City” Bhiwadi, Rajasthan on 19.02.2008 and the complainant paid a total sum of Rs.55,500/-towards the payment of said flat. However, as per the terms and condition No.1, it was assured that the allotment in the upcoming scheme shall be made within 7 months of payment of registration money. But the opposite party failed to lunch the project within the period as assured by them. It was also assured that in case the complainant wanted to withdraw the said scheme, the amount paid by him shall be refunded within 30 days from the date of refund application. Since there was no construction activity on the spot, the complainant applied for refund of the amount of Rs.55,500/- but of no use. Thus, the opposite parties are deficient in providing services to the complainant. The complainant prayed that the opposite parties be directed to refund Rs.55,500/- with interest . He also sought compensation of Rs.20,000/- for harassment and mental agony. The complaint is supported with an affidavit, copy of cancellation application dated 03.08.2012, copy of application dated 27.06.2012 showing details of payment, copy of application for cancellation dated 27.06.2012 with ledger details and payment receipts.
2 OPs in their written reply have alleged that this Forum has got no territorial jurisdiction to adjudicate upon the matter as the plot booked by the complainant was situated at Dev City, Bhiwadi, (Raj). It is denied that the opposite parties failed to lunch the project as was promised within normal period. It is also denied that the allotment in the upcoming scheme shall be made within 7 months of payment of registration money. The money deposited by the complainant was used for the development of the project and not for personal gains and business enhancement. It is the complainant who failed to pay the installments in time. Thus, there was no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties.
3 We have heard the complainant and the learned counsel for the opposite parties and have perused the record available on file carefully.
4 Therefore, from the facts and circumstances of the case, evidence on the file and the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, it emerges that the complainant has filed the present complaint against the OPs alleging deficiency in service on their part on the ground that he booked a flat measuring 1191 sq. ft vide Registration No. 62865 on 19.02.2008 and paid a total sum of Rs.55,500/-towards the said flat but the opposite parties failed to construct the project within the stipulated period which tantamounts to deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties.
5 However, the contention of the OP is that this Forum has got no jurisdiction to adjudicate upon the matter as the plot booked by the complainant was situated at Dev City, Bhiwadi, (Raj). However, the complainant failed to pay the installments from time to time and thus, it is the complainant who is defaulter in making the payment and thus, there was no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties.
6 Therefore, from the facts and circumstances of the case and the evidence placed on file it is evident that the complainant has booked a flat with the OP in their project Dev City, Bhiwadi, Rajasthan on 19.02.2008 and deposited a total sum of Rs.55,500/- toward the said flat. There is nothing on the file that the opposite parties have completed the construction within the stipulated period and as such the opposite parties failed to complete the construction as proposed by them within the stipulated period. However, the complainant has also failed to deposit the installments in time and thus, both the parties are at fault and therefore, to meet the ends of justice we direct the opposite parties to refund the amount deposited by the complainant with the OP.
7 However, the argument that this Forum has got no jurisdiction is not sustainable in the eye of law because OP-2 has got its office at Gurgaon and the payments were received by the Gurgaon Branch of the OP. Therefore, we are inclined to hold that a part of cause of action arose at Gurgaon and this Form has got jurisdiction to adjudicate upon the matter.
8 Therefore, in view of our above observation, we direct the opposite parties to refund Rs.55,500/- with interest @ 9 % p.a. from the date of filing of the present complaint i.e. 29.04.2014 till realization. The complainant is also entitled to compensation for harassment and mental agony as well as litigation expenses to the tune of Rs.7,000/-. The opposite parties shall make the compliance of the order within 30 days from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. The parties concerned be communicated of the order accordingly and the file be consigned to the records after due compliance.
Announced (Subhash Goyal)
14.12.2015 President,
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Forum, Gurgaon
(Jyoti Siwach) (Surender Singh Balyan)
Member Member
