Delhi

North East

CC/401/2022

Arunava Choudhary - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s Gaurbizpark - Opp.Party(s)

13 May 2024

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION: NORTH-EAST

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

D.C. OFFICE COMPLEX, BUNKAR VIHAR, NAND NAGRI, DELHI-93

Complaint Case No. 401/22

In the matter of:

 

		Arunava Choudhary & Arindam Choudhary Both S/o Shri A.K Choudhary R/o H.No. J-8/2, S 3, Kalinga Apt. West Jyoti Nagar, Shahdara, Delhi 110094		Complainants
		Versus
		M/s Gaurbizpark, Office at Plot No. 1 & 2, Abhay Khand II, Indirapuram, Ghaziabad, U.P Project: M/s Garusportswood Pvt. Ltd., Plot No. SC01/E 1, Sportscity, Sector 79, Noida, U.P		Opposite Party
			DATE OF INSTITUTION: JUDGMENT RESERVED ON:                   DATE OF ORDER:		20.10.2022 18.01.2024 13.05.2024

 

CORAM:

Surinder Kumar Sharma, President

Anil Kumar Bamba, Member

Adarsh Nain, Member

ORDER

Surinder Kumar Sharma, President

The Complainant filed the present complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

Case of the Complainants

1. The case of the Complainants as revealed from the record is that on 23.04.2016 they had booked a flat bearing no. Block J-639 from Opposite Party. Complainants stated that the total area of the flat was 1850 Sq. Ft. Complainants stated that on the occasion of completion of 21 years in the real estate market a special scheme was introduced by M/s Gaursons, whereby 21 special facilities were provided to the customers who booked the flat at that very period of time along with booking of the flat. Complainants stated that they took the possession on 12.10.2019 but due to lack of basic infrastructure and later on Covid 19 Lockdown, they did not shift to that flat. Complainants stated that as per the contract and benefit provided by the Builder, at that point, where a moratorium of society charges for one year from the date of possession or start of compulsory maintenance charges implementation whichever was earlier and in this regard an email from M/s Gaursons intimating about getting Occupational Certificate from Noida Authority on 01.03.2019. Complainants stated that as per the facts implementation of compulsory maintenance charges should be from 01.03.2019 and accordingly they should be charged from this date only. Complainant stated that M.s Gaursons had given benefit for only four months i.e. March 2019 to June 2019 and charged form them from July 2019 to February 2020 @ Rs. 6,500/-. Complainants stated that in this regard they visited the office of Opposite Party and also sent a letter but they asked them to contact the site office and site office in turn sent them to the head office in 2022 and till date they did not get any solution in this regard. Complainant has prayed to direct the Opposite Party to pay Rs. 52,000/- and Rs. 40,000/- as mental harassment and compensation.

Case of the Opposite Party

2. The Opposite Party contested the case and filed its written statement. It is stated that the Complainants have concealed the material facts. It is stated that the Opposite Party agrees that the maintenance charges should be levied from 01.03.2019 i.e. the date of occupational certificate. It is stated that the levy of maintenance charges was a result of unintentional human error. It is stated that the amount claimed by the Complainant is due and payable.    

Rejoinder to the written statement of Opposite Party

3. The Complainant filed rejoinder to the written statement of Opposite Party, wherein the Complainant has denied the pleas raised by the Opposite Party and has reiterated the assertions made in the complaint.

Evidence of the Parties

4. The Complainant in support of their complaint filed their evidence by way of affidavit, wherein they have supported the averments made in the complaint. The Opposite Party has filed affidavit of Shri Dhruv Gupta, Assistant Manager (Legal) of Opposite Party.

Arguments & Conclusion

5. We have heard the Ld. Counsel for the Complainant and Opposite Party. We have also perused the file and the written arguments filed by the Complainant and Opposite Party. The case of the Complainants is that the Opposite Party has wrongfully charged Rs. 52,000/- as maintenance charges of the flat from them. Admittedly, the Opposite Party in its written statement has stated that this amount was charged from the Complainants due to some error and also admitted that the said amount is payable to the Complainants. Therefore, it is ordered that the Opposite Party shall pay an amount of Rs. 52,000/- to the Complainants along with interest @ 9 % p.a. from the date of filing the complaint till recovery. The Opposite Party is also ordered to pay an amount of Rs. 10,000/- to the Complainants on account of mental harassment and litigation expenses along with interest @ 9 % p.a. from the date of this order till recovery.   
6. Order announced on 13.05.2024.

Copy of this order be given to the parties free of cost.

File be consigned to Record Room.

 

(Anil Kumar Bamba)           Member

(Adarsh Nain)       Member

(Surinder Kumar Sharma) President