BEFORE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SAHIBZADA AJIT SINGH NAGAR (MOHALI)
Consumer Complaint No.596 of 2015
Date of institution: 04.11.2015
Date of Decision: 16.06.2016
Rohit Kohli son of K.R. Kohli resident of House No.65, Silver City, Main Ambala Chandigarh Road, Zirakpur.
……..Complainant
Versus
M/s. BNK Investments, Silver City, Main Ambala Chandigarh Road, Zirakpur.
………. Opposite Party
Complaint under Section 12 of the
Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
CORAM
Mrs. Madhu. P. Singh, President.
Shri Amrinder Singh Sidhu, Member
Mrs. R.K. Aulakh, Member.
Present: Complainant in person.
OP ex-parte.
(Mrs. Madhu P. Singh, President)
ORDER
The complainant has filed the present complaint seeking following direction to the Opposite Party (for short ‘the OP’) to:
- Make payment of Rs.9,95,844/- alongwith interest from 31.03.2013 till actual payment.
- to pay him Rs.2,00,000/- on account of compensation for mental harassment and agony.
The case of the complainant is that he purchased property (kiosk) in Cosmo Plaza on Chandigarh –Ambala Highway through the OP on 07.03.2006 by paying Rs.50,00,000/- as full and final payment on 26.06.2008. The OP entered into an agreement with the complainant that till the possession of the kiosk is delivered to the complainant, it would pay him an amount of Rs.36,883/- per month as an assured return amount as per Clause-A of Committed Return Plan. The possession of the kiosk was to be delivered to the complainant by 31.12.2008. The OP had paid few installments of assured return to the complainant for the period from 07.07.2008 to 30.03.2013 and thereafter stopped making further payment to him. Thereafter, the OP had failed to deliver the possession of the kiosk and also stopped to pay the assured return to the complainant. The complainant is suffering loss of interest on the amount deposited with the OP as more than 7 years have passed since the deposit of payment with the OP. With these allegations, the complainant has filed the present complaint.
2. On 21.01.2016 Shri Sandeep Bhardwaj, Advocate has filed memo of appearance for the OP and sought time to file POA/reply. Thereafter neither anybody appeared on behalf of the OP nor reply was filed. Accordingly the OP was proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated 15.02.2016.
3. Evidence of the complainant consists of his affidavit Ex.CW-1/1 and copies of documents Ex.C-1 to C-4.
5. We have heard the complainant and have also gone through the written arguments filed by him.
6. The complainant has booked a kiosk on the third floor measuring super area 614.72 sq. ft. of the commercial complex developed by the OP and has signed the builder buyers agreement dated 27.06.2008. The complainant has got the allotment of commercial space for running his shop for earning his livelihood by way of self employment and paid the total sum of Rs.50,98,871/- as on 26.06.2008 and the said payment has been made under committed return plan. As per buyers agreement, after completion of construction of the shop the same was to be handed over to the allottee/complainant by 31.12.2008 and during this period i.e. from the date of signing of buyers agreement dated 27.06.2008 till proposed date of possession i.e. 31.12.2008 in the event of any delay in completion of the project, upto the date of handing over of the completed shop to the complainant, the OP has agreed to pay a monthly sum of Rs. 36,883/-. As per the complainant the OP has faithfully paid the assured return upto April, 2013 but later on stopped paying till date as he has not handed over the possession of the property till date to the complainant. Therefore, the complainant is entitled to receive the sum of assured return of Rs.36,883/- from May, 2013 till date. By not fulfilling its promise of assured return from May, 2013 till date, is an act of unfair trade practice on the part of the OP and, therefore, the complainant has raised the consumer dispute in the present complaint.
7. The complainant has proved the buyers agreement Ex.C-1 and Clause- A of the buyers agreement clearly stipulates committed return plan. In order to prove that he has received assured return upto April, 2013 the complainant has relied upon computer generated ledger account of the complainant as per records of the OP which shows that from 01.04.2013 onwards the monthly assured return of Rs.36,883/- has not been paid by the OP. However, during pendency of the complaint, the OP has issued one cheque of Rs.33,195/- dated 27.04.2016 against the assured return for the month of June, 2013. The act of issuance of cheque amount due for the month of June, 2013 per se proves that the OP has not paid the outstanding amount from May, 2013 onwards. Therefore, the act of unfair trade practice and deficiency in service on the part of the OP has been amply proved by the complainant.
8. In view of above discussions, the complaint is allowed against the OP with the following directions:
(a) to pay to the complainant assured return of Rs.36,883/- per month w.e.f. 01.04.2013 (minus Rs.33,195/- paid during pendency of the complaint) alongwith interest @ 9% per annum w.e.f. 01.04.2013 till the possession of the kiosk is handed over to him.
(b) to pay to the complainant a lump sum compensation of Rs.25,000/- (Rs. Twenty five thousand only) for mental agony, harassment and costs of litigation.
Compliance of the above directions be made within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. Certified copies of the order be furnished to the parties forthwith free of cost and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room.
Pronounced.
June 16, 2016.
(Mrs. Madhu P. Singh)
President
(Amrinder Singh Sidhu)
Member
(Mrs. R.K. Aulakh)
Member
