COMPLAINTS FILED ON:22.02.2012
DISPOSED ON:30.06.2012
BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM AT BANGALORE (URBAN)
30th DAY OF JUNE 2012
PRESENT:- SRI. B.S. REDDY PRESIDENT
SRI.A.MUNIYAPPA MEMBER
COMPLAINT Nos.388/2012 & 392/2012
Complaint no.388/2012 Complainant | Smt.Geetha W/o K. Ashokan, Aged about 44 years, Residing at New No.2, Old No.91, Varun Nilaya, 2nd Cross, N.R.Colony, Murgeshpalaya, Bangalore-560 017. Adv:Sri.A.Jayaprakash |
Complaint no.392/2012 Complainant | K.Preman S/o K.Govindan, Aged about 33 years, Residing at Quarter No.55/6, HQ Training Command Air Force, Mekri Circle, Near Hebbal, Bangalore-560 006. Adv:Sri.A.Jayaprakash |
OPPOSITE PARTY/S | 1. M/s EX SERVICEMAN WELFARE ORGANIZATION, At 2nd Floor, A & B Block, Ammiamma Complex, Linden Street, Austintown, Bangalore-560 047. Represented by its General Secretary Mr.Gurugovinda and President Mr.M.Ningappa 2. M.A.Sharieff, Proprietor, M/s M.A.S.Developers, Sy.No.62, Muthurayanapura Village, Bidadi Hobli, Ramanagar District. Ex-parte. |
| | |
| | | | |
COMMON ORDER
SRI. B.S.REDDY, PRESIDENT
Both these complaints Under Section-12 of the Consumer Protection Act by the respective complainants are to direct the Ops to refund the advance sale consideration deposited towards allotment of sites and for compensation on the allegation of deficiency in service.
2. Since Ops are common in both these complaints, the questions involved and the relief’s claimed being similar, in order to avoid the repetition of facts and multiplicity of reasoning’s both these complaints are stand disposed of by this common order.
3. In spite of service of notice, Ops failed to appear without any justifiable cause, hence placed ex-parte.
4.The complainants in order to substantiate complaint averments, each of these complainants filed affidavit.
5. Arguments from complainant’s side heard,
6.We have gone through the complaint averments, the documents produced and affidavit evidence of complainants. On the basis of these materials, it becomes clear that the complainant in complaint No.388/2012 deposited initial sale consideration of Rs.21,600/- with Ops on 05.07.2006 and Rs.1,20,960/- on 31.12.2007 and Ops have issued the receipt and they have also executed the agreement deed on 05.01.2008. Thus the complainant in all has deposited initial sale consideration of Rs.1,42,560/-.
The complainant in complaint No.392/2012 has deposited an amount of Rs.1,42,560/- (Rs.21,600/- on 29.04.2006 and Rs.1,20,960/- on 31.12.2007). Ops have issued the receipt and executed the agreement deed dt.10.01.2008.
7. OP1 is a registered organization established to form a residential layout and allot the sites formed in the layout to its members. These complainants became the members of the OP-Society with an intention to own residential sites. OP1 through 2nd OP had proposed to formed a residential layout in the name of Indraprashta Defense Colony, Dodderi Village, Tavarekere Hobli, Bangalore South and allotted sites in favour of these complainants measuring 1200 sq ft after receiving initial deposits as stated above. After receiving the amounts, Ops neither formed the layout and allotted the sites nor refunded the amount to these complainants. The complainants issued letters demanding for refund of the amounts. In spite of these letters, Ops failed to comply the demand. The General Secretary of OP1 issued letter dt.10.05.2011 stating that they are unable to refund the amount and requested to provide time till 25/05/2011. In spite of granting sufficient time, Ops failed to refund the amount. The act of Ops neither forming layout and allotting the sites nor refunding the amount received towards initial deposit from these complainants, amounts to deficiency in service.
8. There is no reason to disbelieve the unchallenged affidavit of the complainants and the documents produced. The very fact of Ops remaining ex-parte leads to draw inference that they are admitting the claim of the complainants. The complainants are entitled for refund of the amounts paid with interest at 18% p.a. by way of compensation along with litigation costs of Rs.2,000/- each. Accordingly, we proceed to pass the following:
O R D E R
Both these complaints filed by the complainants are allowed in part.
In complaint No.388/2012 Ops are directed to refund an amount of Rs.1,42,560/- with interest at 18% p.a. from the respective date of payments, till the date of realization and pay litigation cost of Rs.2,000/- to the complainant.
In complaint No.392/2012 Ops are directed to refund an amount of Rs.1,42,560/- with interest at 18% p.a. from the respective date of payments, till the date of realization and pay litigation cost of Rs.2,000/- to the complainant.
This order is to be complied within four weeks from the date of its communication.
This original order shall be kept in the file of the complaint No.388/2012 and a copy of it shall be placed in other connected files.
Send copy of this order to both the parties free of costs.
(Dictated to the Stenographer and typed in the computer and transcribed by her verified and corrected, and then pronounced in the Open Court by us on this the 30th day of JUNE-2012.)
MEMBER PRESIDENT
Cs.
