Case No.CC/68/2020

Date of Institution:- 20.02.2020

Order Reserved on :- 04.09.2024

           Date of Order :- 12.09.2024

IN THE MATTER OF:

Smt. Shashi Chandra

W/o Sh. Rajeev Srivastav,

R/o House No. C-89, Sector-23,

Noida, Uttar Pradesh.

Also at :

B-20, 2^nd Floor, Janta Colony,

New Delhi – 110027.

          …..Complainant

VERSUS

M/s. D Krissh Builders Private Limited

Through its Directors,

Regd. Office :

408, DLF Tower-A, Jasola,

New Delhi – 110025.

Also at :

Noida Expressway, Sector-135,

Near Metlife Building,

Noida, U.P.

… Opposite Party

O R D E R

Per R. C. YADAV , MEMBER

1. The brief facts of the case are thatOP is a registered private limited company deals in real estate market and having its registered office at 408, DLF Tower-A, Jasola, New Delhi. The OP has induced the complainant that the OP have all the necessary approvals from the concerned departments for selling the farm houses to the individuals and land is clear in all aspects. The OP has assured the complainant that the complainant can live with her family members at the said farm house and same can be used for residential purposes at all the times. The OP has induced the complainant to purchase the farm house measuring 1200 sq. yd. in its project at Noida Expressway Sector-135, Noida, U.P. for the total consideration of Rs.51,40,000/-.  The complainant has duly submitted application with OP vide receipt no. 1051 amounting to Rs.1,00,000/- dated 13.07.2017 of the payment of booking amount was issued to the complainant by the OP.  The complainant has time to time made payment as demand raised by the OP and has paid a sum of Rs.8,50,000/- (Rupees Eight Lakh Fifty Thousand) to the OP for the above said booking of farm house which has been duly acknowledged by the OP vide its receipts issued to the complainant time to time. The OP has promised the complainant to handover physical possession and allotment letter within 12 months from the date of booking. However, OP has failed to comply the same and till yet not handed over the physical possession of farm house. The complainant has visited the site of the project but every time she got disappointed to see that no construction work was going on at the site and the land was lying vacant.  The proposed project has remained vacant even after passing of atleast two years, the construction work at the project site has not even started by the OP.  The complainant has paid money for this farm house for residence purpose after retirement of her husband. The OP have fraudulently induced the complainant as promised to the complainant by not handing over  the physical possession of farm house to the complainant even after lapse of two years and no approval and sanction had been obtained from the concerned departments. The complainant has requested to refund of deposited money but the OP has not refunded the deposited amount to the complainant. The complainant has prayed for refund of Rs.8,50,000/- (Rupees Eight Lakh Fifty Thousand) alogwith Rs.2,00,000/- for mental agony and harassment and Rs.55,000/- for litigation charges.
2. Notice was served to OP but OP did not attend the proceedings before this Commission and OP was proceeded Ex-Parte vide order dated 03.02.2023. 
3. The complainant has filed Ex-parte evidence and written arguments in support of his case.
4. On 04.09.2024, the case was listed for arguments and we have heard Sh. Gurcharan Singh, Ld. Counsel for the complainant and OP is Ex-parte. Hence, the order was reserved.
5. We have carefully considered the material on record and thoroughly.
6. It is the case of the complainant that the OP has induced the complainant to purchase the farm house measuring 1200 sq. yd. in its project at Noida Expressway Sector 135, Noida, U.P. for the total consideration of Rs.51,40,000/-.  The complainant has duly submitted application with OP vide receipt no. 1051 amounting to Rs.1,00,000/- dated 13.07.2017 of the payment of booking amount was issued to the complainant by the OP.  The complainant has time to time made payment as demand raised by the OP and has paid a sum of Rs.8,50,000/- (Rupees Eight Lakh Fifty Thousand) to the OP for the above said booking of farm house which has been duly acknowledged by the OP vide its receipts issued to the complainant time to time. The OP has promised the complainant to handover physical possession and allotment letter to the complainant within 12 months from the date of booking. However, OP has failed to comply the same and till yet not handed over the physical possession of farm house. The complainant has visited the site of the project but every time she got disappointed to see that no construction work was going on at the site and the land was lying vacant.  The proposed project has remained vacant even after passing of atleast two years, the construction at the project site has not even started by the OP.  The complainant has paid money for this farm house for residence purpose after retirement of her husband. The OP have fraudulently induced the complainant as promised to the complainant by not handing over  the physical possession of farm house to the complainant even after lapse of two years and no approval and sanction had been obtained from the concerned departments. The complainant has requested to refund of deposited money but the OP has not refunded the deposited amount to the complainant.
7. It is the case of the complainant that when she did not get the possession of the farm house so sought the refund of the deposited amount, but the same has not been refunded by the OP despite repeated requests.  It is his case that this conduct of the OP amounts deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. Non-delivery of the possession of the farm house on receipt of the booked amount within a reasonable time amounts to deficiency in service.

“Supreme Court Judgment in the case of Kolkata West International City Vs. DevasisRudra dated 25.03.2019 Civil Appeal 3182/2019 is an authority on this point.”

8. It is the case of the complainant that when she did not get the possession of the farm house, she asked for refund the deposited amount but the same has not been refunded by the OP.   The allegations made by the complainant have gone unchallenged, unrebutted and uncontested and as such whatever has been placed on record is believed.
9. From the facts of the case and evidence placed on the record, it is clear that receipt of the deposit amount of Rs.8,50,000/- from the complainant, the OP has neither handed over the possession of the farm house nor refunded the amount to the complainant and this act apparently and clearly constitutes deficiency in service, monopolistic and unfair trade practice on the part of the OP.
10. Accordingly, we allow the complaint of the complainant and direct the OP to refund Rs.8,50,000/- (Rupees Eight Lakh Fifty Thousand)alonwth interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of deposited amount and Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakh)as lumpsumfor mental harassment and litigation charges to the complainant within 45 days from date of receipt of order failing which the OP shall be liable to pay the entire amount with interest @ 9% p.a. till realization.

• Copy of the order be given/sent to the parties as per rule.
• The file be consigned to Record Room.
• Announce in the open Court on 12.09.2024.