District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission ,Faridabad.
Consumer Complaint No.137/2021.
Date of Institution: 16.03.2021.
Date of Order: 08.06.2022.
Kalyan Singh S/o Shri Tej Singh, R/o H.No. 528, Sector-17, Faridabad. Adhaar No. 3917 8117 1585, Mobile No. 9899160585.
…….Complainant…..
Versus
1. M/s. BPTP Limited, Park Lands Haryana, Sector-85, Faridabad through its Director/principal Officer.
2. M/s. BPTP Limited, M-11, Middle Circle, Connaught circus, New Delhi, through its Director/principal Officer.
Also at: Plot No. 115, Udyog Vihar, Phase-IV, Gurugram.
…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.
PRESENT: Sh Ajay Yadav , counsel for the complainant.
Sh. Jay Shankar, AR on behalf of opposite parties.
ORDER:
The facts in brief of the complaint are that the opposite parties offered a provisional booking of plot measuring 250 sq. yards at their project i.e Proj-4 “Parklands” Park-81, at Faridabad. The complainant made a provisional registration and booked a residential plot measuring 250 sq. yards in opposite party future project i.e Proj-4, “Parklands Park-81, Faridabad in the month of January 2006 and also paid a sum of Rs.5,15,625/- through cheque No. 277306 dated 07.01.2006 drawn on IDBI Bank, Faridabad, Accordingly, the opposite parties issued receipt of Rs.5,.15,625/- dated 02.01.2006 and accept the provisional booking of the complainant. The opposite party later on offered a booking against the provisional registration for plot measuring 250 sq. yards and also made a demand of Rs.31,8,750/- vide their letter dated 04.03.2006. After receiving the said letter dated 04.03.2006 the complainant had deposited an amount of Rs.3,18,750/- vide cheque No. 277320 dated 12.04.2006 and opposite parties accordingly issued a receipt No. 11435 dated 14.04.2006 in respect of acknowledgement of provisional registration application, but due to some unavoidable circumstances, the above said cheques were bounced by the bank. After getting intimation regarding bouncing of cheque as informed by the opposite parties. The complainant had deposited a sum of Rs.3,18,750/- through cheque No.277323 dated 24.06.2006 against the bounced cheque and opposite parties accordingly issued a receipt No. MRN 15229 dated 24.06.2006 in respect of acknowledgement of provisional registration application, but the opposite parties intentionally not presented the said mentioned cheque for encashment and not returned original cheque to the complainant till date. Thereafter the complainant again deposited a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- with the opposite parties through cheque NO. 605641 dated 10.08.2006 and opposite party accordingly issued a receipt No. 26423 dated 01.09.2006. On dated 11.04.2008, the complainant made demand draft bearing No. 138247 dated 11.04.2008 of Rs.2,50,000/- drawn on Bank of Baroda, in favour of the opposite party, but the opposite parties with an malafide intention did not accept the demand draft for a sum of Rs.2,50,000/- from the complainant. The complainant had paid a total sum of Rs.7,15,625/- with the opposite parties against plot measuring 250 sq. yards, Parkland, Sector-81, Faridabad. The opposite parties assured that they would allot the plot measuring 250 sq. yards to the complainant within three years, but they did not do so. The complainant was shocked when he received letter dated 20.05.2008 issued by the opposite party regarding cancellation of booking of plot in their project “Parklands” Faridabad. Thereafter the complainant immediately personally contact the concerned person of the opposite parties then said officials inform the complainant the due to some technical defect and unavoidable circumstances opposite parties were unable to allot the plot measuring 250 sq. yards to the complainant. The officials of the opposite parties asked the complainant that now they wee start booking of independent residential floor/flat at their Group Housing Project, park-81, Parkland, at Faridabad and also asked the complainant that if the complainant made booking in said flat then the opposite parties will adjust the full amount i.e. Rs.7,15,625/- deposited by the complainant in respect of the booking of the plot measuring 250 sq. yards, parklands, Faridabad, if the complainant not interested to book flat then the opposite parties would only refund the registration amount to the complainant. The officials of the opposite parties also gave assurance that opposite parties would handover the possession of the flat within a period of 5 years from the date of booking. On believing on the assurances of the opposite parties, the complainant booked a independent residential floor on the plot area tentatively admeasuring about 275 sq. yards with approx. 1402 sq. ft. Built up area in opposite parties project i.e Park018, Parklands, Faridabad and the complainant also paid a sum of rs.3,00,000/- through cheque No. 413692 dated 20.09.2009 drawn on Andhra Bank, Faridabad to the opposite parties and accordingly opposite parties issued receipt bearing NO. 2009/1400022652 dated 26.09.2009. After the payment of above said Rs.3,00,000/- to the opposite parties the complainant visited the office of the opposite parties then again opposite parties assured that they had adjusted a sum of Rs.7,15,625/- in the consideration of the above said independent residential floor and also assured that possession of the said plot would be delivered to the complainant within 5 years. The complainant asked opposite parties to issued adjustment letter of an amount of Rs.7,15,625/- but the opposite parties asked there was no need to issued letter. In this way, the complainant had paid a total sum of Rs.10,15,625/- with the opposite parties regarding the booking of independent residential floor in their project “Park-81, Parklands, Faridabad till date. However, the opposite parties verbally allotted the independent residential floor (without any number) to the complainant, but they never issued any allotment letter to the complainant. The opposite parties had failed to delivery/offer the possession of any floor/flat to the complainant. The complainant asked several times to the opposite parties to refund the amount of Rs.10,15,625/- alongwith interest to the complainant but the opposite parties always avoided it on one pretext or the other. The complainant filed a consumer complaint against the opposite party in the month of July, 2019 vide case titled as “Kalyan Singh Versus BPTP & Others”. bearing No.CC No. 353/2019. On dated 19.01.2021 the said consumer complaint was withdrawn by the complainant due to some technical and typographically defects in the said complaint with the permission to file the fresh complaint. 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 an amount of Rs.13,34,375/- alongwith interest @ 18% p.a. from the date of its deposit till realization of whole amount in lieu of non-allotment of any floor/flat to the complainant.
b) pay Rs50,000/- as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment .
c) pay Rs. 11,000/- as litigation expenses .
2. Opposite parties put in appearance through counsel and filed written statement wherein Opposite parties refuted claim of the complainant and submitted that in the year 2005, the complainant after having conducting due diligence at his end, through his broker namely ‘Suraj Realtors pvt. Ltd. Approached the opposite party with a desire to seek booking/allotment of a plot in the project of the opposite party (tentative size of 250 sq. yards). The complainant on his own will decided to invest a sum of Rs.5,15,625/- vide cheque bearing N. 277307 dated 31.12.2005 drawn on IDBI Bank as booking amount on 31.12.2005, thereby on account of agreeing and accepting the documented clauses submitted application for provisional registration of plot. The opposite party on clearance of stated cheque issued receipt dated 02.01.2006. It was stated that the complainant was well aware of the condition that he was required to deposit 45% of the basic sale price of the plot against provisional registration in order to confirm booking in his name. accordingly, in lieu of the same the opposite party in the month of March 2006 raised demand amounting to Rs.3,18,750/- and the complainant tendered a cheque bearing No. 277320 dated 12.04.2006 drawn on IDBI Bank amounting to Rs.3,18,750/- towards said amount. The opposite party for clearance of said demand presented the said cheque before the concerned bank, as a result the said cheque was dishonored due to ‘insufficient balance’ into the accounts of the complainant. The opposite party on account of securing booking rights of the complainant informed him about the same and requested to tender another cheque. Hence, the complainant towards said demand, tendered another cheque bearing NO. 277323 dated 19.06.2006 drawn on IDBI Bank amounting to Rs.3,18,750/-. The opposite party presented said new cheque before the concerned bank, and again the said cheque was dishonored due to ‘insufficient balance’ into the accounts of the complainant. Due to failure in completing negligibility criteria for booking by the complainant, the opposite party was constrained ot issue reminder letter dated 13.07.2008 wherein evidently made a request to the complainant to remit the aforesaid payments considering the same as alst opportunity and on receipt of the said amount, the opposite party would confirm the booking in the name of the complainant. It was undoubtedly with comprehensive enumeration made by the opposite party that failure in making said payment within 15 days from the date of this reminder letter, it would be construed that the complainant was not interested in the booking of the plot and could cause cancellation of the provisional registration of the complainant without any further notice, while forfeiting the earnest money and he should be left with no claim. After delay of months, the complainant tendered a demand draft bearing No. 605641 dated 10.08.2006 amounting to Rs.2,00,000/- (part payment towards outstanding demand), against which receipt dated 01.09.2006 was issued. The complainant again defaulted in making payment of remaining sale consideration, on account to which the opposite party requested the complainant to complete the said remaining amount at the earliest but the complainant did not pay any heed. Consequently, timely remittance of the due payments was and was the essence of the transaction, but the complainant had miserably failed to pay the outstanding amounts despite of being given various opportunities/communication from time to time to confirm the booking and get the plot allotted in the Parklands project, thus the opposite party vide letter dated 26.05.2008 informed the complainant that validly provisional registration had been cancelled/terminated and the opposite party was entitled to forfeit the earnest money, which was a settled law of principle in contravention to the various judgements of the Apex Court. It was quite perspicupis to allege that on receipt of cancellation/termination letter dated 26.05.2008, the complainant never stepped forward and contacted the opposite party with regard to above stated provisional registration, instead waited for a good amount of time to pass away i.e. approximately twelve years to claim the refund alongwith interest @ 18% p.a. In this way, the complainant had withhold a vital information in order to gain advantage in the current scenarios and difficult times faced by the companies, on the other side then he would be guilty of playing fraud on this Hon’ble Commission as well as on the opposite party. In the interim time, where the complainant failed to seek a booking/allotment of a plot in the Parklands project of the opposite party, the complainant on his own volition and after having conducting due diligence through broker namely “A.R. Property Solutions again approached the opposite party with a desire to seek a booking/allotment of a residential independent floor in the project ‘ Park-81, Parklands developed by the opposite party. The complainant on his own will decided to invest a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- vide cheque bearing NO. 413692 as booking amount, against which receipt dated 26.09.2009 was issued by the opposite party. In terms of payment plan opted and agreed by the complainant, the opposite arty vide its letter dated 21.12.2009 raised demand upon reaching milestone ‘within 90 days of booking of 20% of BSP amounting to Rs.3,00,000/- and granted Timely Payment Discount (TPD) of Rs.15,000/-, if said demand was payable on or before 05.01.2010 by the complainant in order to become eligible for allotment. The complainant defaulted in making timely payment of the demand raised vide letter dated 21.12.2009. Thereby the opposite party vide its letter dated 05.06.2010, duly intimated that the complainant had not made the required payment to make himself eligible for allotment as a result the complainant’s booking form had not been considered and his booking/allotment stood cancelled. The opposite party being a customer centric organization and with an intent to secure booking/allotment rights of the complainant, vide said letter further offered alternate operations in other ongoing projects in Parkland, Faridabad i.e. princess park, Park Grandeura, Park Floor-I, Park Floor-II. Opposite parties denied rest of the allegations leveled in the complaint and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
3. The parties led evidence in support of their respective versions.
4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record on the file.
5. In this case the complaint was filed by the complainant against opposite parties –BPTP with the prayer to : a) refund an amount of Rs.13,34,375/- alongwith interest @ 18% p.a. from the date of its deposit till realization of whole amount in lieu of non-allotment of any floor/flat to the complainant. b) pay Rs50,000/- as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment . c) pay Rs. 11,000/- as litigation expenses .
6. Counsel for the complainant has made a statement that the complaint alongwith documents already filed by him be read as the evidence of the complainant and closed the same. Accordingly, evidence of the complainant has been closed vide order dated 6.6.2022.. Complainant has filed his complaint alongwith the documents i.e. photocopies of registration receipt, Acknowledgement of provisional registration application, registration receipts, letter dated 26.05.2008, Receipt No. 2009/1400022652, letters.
7. Shri Jay Shankar, AR on behalf of opposite party has made a statement on 30.05.2022 that “We are ready to refund the paid amount alongwith simple interest from the date of filing of the complaint.” Hence, no need of evidence on behalf of opposite parties.
8. We have heard the parties & appraised the material on record carefully & now the Commission is of the opinion that due to any reason whatsoever the whole or part of the project in question is abandoned or the completion of the project is delayed due to any reasons, the responsibility and liability of the opposite parties/seller will be to refund to the complainant/purchaser(s) the total amount as may be received by the seller.
9. Hence, In the interest of justice, complaint is disposed off with the direction to opposite parties to refund the entire money paid by the Complainant along with interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of each deposit respectively till the date of payment within 60 days of the receipt of this order.
10.. In case the order is not complied with within the next 60 days from the date of receipt of the copy of the order, the rate of interest will increase from 9% to 12% p.a. for the period beyond that till the date of realization of the payment. Opposite parties are also directed to pay Rs.3300/- as compensation for mental tension and agony and also to pay Rs.2200/- as litigation expenses to the complainants. Compliance of this order be made within 60 days from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. Copy of this order be sent to the parties concerned free of costs. File be consigned to the record room.
Announced on: 08.06.2022 (Amit Arora)
President
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Faridabad.
(Mukesh Sharma)
Member
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Faridabad.
