District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission ,Faridabad.
Consumer Complaint No. 462/2019.
Date of Institution:19.09.2019.
Date of Order: 05.04.2023.
Ms. Vijaylaxmi Sharma D/o late Shri Brij Bhushan Goswami permanent R/o H.NO. 754, Sector-9, Faridabad, presently R/o H.NO. 602, Sector-9, Faridabad.
…….Complainant……..
Versus
1. M/s. AVS Contractors Pvt. Ltd., Regd. office at D-248/10, Laxmi Nagar, East Delhi – 110 092 through its Managing Director.
Corporate office at UGF-36-37, Ozone Centre, Sector-12, Faridabad – 121007.
2. Vikram Dhawan S/o Shri Raj Dhawan R/o H. No. 1818, Sector-17, Gurugram, Haryana. Director M/s. AVS Contractors Pvt. Ltd.
3. Mr. Mool Chand Sharma r/o H.NO.2, Milk Plant road, Bhatia Colony,, Ballabgarh, Faridabad, Haryana. Director M/s. AVS Contractors Pvt. Ltd.
4. Gajender Singh S/o Shri Lakhan Singh r/o H.NO. 80, Block-5, Village-Mohna Ballabgarh, Faridabad, Haryana. Director M/s. AVs Contractors Pvt. Ltd.
…Opposite parties……
Complaint under section-12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986
Now amended Section 34 of Consumer protection Act 2019.
BEFORE: Amit Arora……………..President
Mukesh Sharma…………Member.
Indira Bhadana………….Member.
PRESENT: Sh. Ashok Kumar/ Sh. S.S.Chaudhary, counsel for the complainant.
Sh. Ram Niwas Sharma, counsel for opposite parties Nos.1,3 & 4.
Opposite party No.2 given up on dated 11.04.2022.
Shri Vinod Mittal, Share-Holder of OP company.
ORDER:
The facts in brief of the complaint are that the complainant applied vide two separate applications bother dated 01.08.2022 alongwith all the requisite documents demanded and required by the opposite parties for the investment o their future project and for her registration for allotment of two unit (plot measuring 160 sq. yards each) in upcoming projects i.e. Ozone City-2, Chawandi, distt. Alwar (Rajasthan) launched by the opposite parties company and the complainant paid an amount of Rs.3,00,000/- vide two cheques baring NO. 520456 dated 01.08.2012 for Rs.1,50,000/- and cheque No. 520457 dated 01.08.2012 for Rs.1,50,000/- both drawn on the then State Bank of Patiala now State Bank of India, branch at Sector-9, Faridabad which got duly encashed and credited in the bank account of opposite party No.1 which the opposite parties also acknowledged. Apart from that the complainant paid an amount of Rs.1,90,000/- vide cheque No. 520459 dated 01.06.2013 and Rs.1,90,000/- vide cheque No. 520460 datead 01.06.2013 both drawn on the then State Bank of Patiala now State Bank Of India, Sector-9, Faridabad which got duly encashed and credited in the bank account of opposite party No.1 which also the opposite parties acknowledged and had issued receipts thereof. Thus the complainant admittedly had paid an amount of Rs.6,80,000/- to the opposite parties. The complainant vide letter dated 29.04.2015 issued by opposite parties company came to know that opposite party company had provisionally allotted plot No. 1079 against customer code-V0008 and plot No. 1080 against customer Code-V0011 at Ozone City-2, Bhiwadi (Rajasthan) both ad-measuring 146 sq, yards each and these both the letters were not appended with any documents and thereafter the complainant received letter dated 02.11.2018 whereby the complainant was intimated that an earlier letter dated 09.07.2018 was sent to the complainant though not received by her which was to inform the complainant about the development of the project and thereafter the complainant received a letter dated 06.12.018 issued by opposite parties company whereby the opposite parties informed the complainant that opposite parties project had been registered with “Rajasthan RERA” and also informed about the lay-out plan and development of the project in question. The complainant had yet not received any application as mentioned in both the letters dated 29.04.2015 and still possession of the said plots were not even offered till date. The complainant had come to know that so many criminal as well as other cases in different courts were ending against opposite parties and in such circumstances the complainant had lost her faith in opposite party No.1 and wants her entire money back alongwith interest @ 24% p.a. thereupon. The complainant sent legal notice dated 19.06.2019 to the opposite parties but all in vain. The aforesaid act of opposite parties amounts to deficiency of service and hence the complaint. The complainant has prayed for directions to the opposite parties to:
a) refund back the amount of Rs.6,80,000/- alongwith interest @ 24% from the date it was paid to the opposite party company till its realization.
b) pay Rs. 1,00,000/- as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment .
c) pay Rs. 11,000 /-as litigation expenses.
2. Opposite parties Nos.1,3 & 4 put in appearance through counsel and filed written statement wherein Opposite parties Nos.1,3 & 4 refuted claim of the complainant and submitted that the complaint of the complainant was not maintainable before this Hon’ble Commission as admittedly the complainant had mentioned that she had tendered the amount for investment purpose. If the words of the complainant were taken as their face value then financial investment in any project or business does not make complainant as consumer of opposite party. No alleged cause of action have ever accrued at Faridabad hence this Hon’ble Commission had no territorial jurisdiction to try and entertain the present complaint. The project of opposite party No.1 company was at Bhiwadi, Rajasthan and the registered office of the opposite party NO.1 company had been in Delhi at all times and the corporate office was at Gurugram. The present address was only the addresss as permitted by the Registrar of Companies for keeping the statutory records of the company, that too since 2017 as such this Hon’be Commission had no territorial jurisdiction to entertain the present complaint. The complaint of the complainant was hopelessly time barred as per the averments made in the complaint, the complainant had paid last amount as investment on 01.06.2013 and the present complaint had been filed in the year 2019 which was almost after six years of the last payment. Opposite parties Nos.1,3 & 4 denied rest of the allegations leveled in the complaint and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
3. Shri S.S.Chaudhary, counsel for the complainant has made a statement that he gives up opposite party No.2 being unnecessary. Hence, opposite party No.2 was given up from the array of the opposite parties vide order dted 11.04.2022.
4. The parties led evidence in support of their respective versions.
5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record on the file.
6. In this case the complaint was filed by the complainant against opposite parties– AVS Contractors Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. with the prayer to: a) refund back the amount of Rs.6,80,000/- alongwith interest @ 24% from the date it was paid to the opposite party company till its realization. b) pay Rs. 1,00,000/- as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment . c) pay Rs. 11,000 /-as litigation expenses.
To establish his case the complainant has led in his evidence, Ex.CW1/A – affidavit of Vijaylaxmi Sharma,, Ex.C1 – application form, Ex.C2 – application form, Ex.C-3 & 4 – call notices., Ex.C-5 & 6– Receipts, Ex.C-7 & 8 - letter dated April 29,2015, Ex.C-9 – letter dated 02.11.2018, Ex.C-10 – email dated Novt.12,2018, Ex.C-11 - letter dated 06.12.2018, Ex.C-12 to 16 – eamils, Ex.C-17 – legal notice, Ex.C-18 & 19- Envelope receipts, Ex.C-20 – email, Ex.C-21 to 24 – postal receipts, Ex.C-25 – Ck Consignment. Ex.C-26 – Services report, Ex.C-27 – Track consignment.
On the other hand counsel for the opposite parties Nos.1,3 & 4
strongly agitated and opposed. As per the evidence of the opposite parties Nos.1,3 & 4 - affidavit of Shri Sumer Singh s/o Shri Chandan Singh R/o Village Dadota, Tehsil and Distt. Palwal, Haryana, Ex.R-1 – Resolution, Ex.R-2 (colly) – Sparivartan order, Ex.R-3 (Colly) – Registration Certificate of Project, Ex.R-4(colly) - Our Customer Application form, Ex.R-5 - layout plan, Ex.R-6 – Detailed list of sale deeds executed by M/s. AVS Contractor Pvt. Ltd., Ex.R-7 - letter dated 24.06.2020.
7. In this case, the complainant has prayed in his prayer clause to refund back the amount of Rs.6,80,000/- alongwith interest @ 24% from the date it was paid to the opposite party company till its realization.
8. During the course of arguments, Shri Vinod Mittal, share holder of the opposite party company has made a statement that “the aforesaid project in which the refund has been completed long back and the occupation and completion certificate has been obtained on 24.06.2020 which is enclosed as Annexure R-7 (page 90 with our written statement). Opposite party company is competent and ready to deliver the physical possession as well as execution of sale deed of the disputed plots immediately.”
9. Keeping in view of the statement of Shri Vinod Mittal, Share Holder of the opposite party company, the Commission is of the opinion that the complaint is allowed. Opposite party Nos.1,3 & 4 are directed to give the possession of the plots in question and execute the sale deed in favour of the complainant after taking the balance amount from the complainant. Opposite parties are also directed to pay Rs.2200/- as compensation for causing mental agony & harassment alognwith Rs.2200/- as litigation expenses to the complainant. Compliance of this order be made within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. File be consigned to the record room.
Announced on: 05.04.2023 (Amit Arora)
President
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Faridabad.
(Mukesh Sharma)
Member
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Faridabad.
(Indira Bhadana)
Member
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Faridabad.
