Before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Rohtak.
Complaint No. : 40
Instituted on : 13.01.2021
Decided on : 23.08.2023
Mr. Rishi Nagar age 42 years, s/o Sh. R.P.Nagar R/o 693/10, Ram Gopal Colony, Rohtak.
……….………..Complainant.
Vs.
- M/s IDB Space Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. 304, Orbit Mall, AB Road, INDORE, through its Managing Director Atul Suarna.
- IBD Corporate Office-Airen Heights, 5th Floor, 503-505 PU 14 Sch No. 54, AB Road, Indore, Phone 0731-428555 through its Manager.
- IDB Space Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Having its site Office Balmont Park, village Kilod Hola, Near IDA’s SCM Part II, Indore, Madhya Pradesh through Manager.
- Mr. Atul Surana, Managing Director IDB Space Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., Balmont Park, Village Kilod Hola, Near IDA’s SCM, Part-II, Indore(M.P.)
- Mr. Arun Dagaria, Director, IDB Space Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. , Balmont Park, Village Kilod Hola, Near IDA’S SCM, Part-II, Indore(M.P.)
- Mr. Pushpender Singh Thakur, Director, IDB Space Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Balmont Park, Village Kilod Hola, Near IDA’S SCM, Part-II, Indore(M.P.).
- Housing Development Finance Corporation Limited (HDFC), Model Town, Rohtak Branch through its Manager.
..…….……….Opposite parties.
COMPLAINT U/S 35 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,2019.
BEFORE: SH.NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT.
DR. TRIPTI PANNU, MEMBER.
DR.VIJENDER SINGH, MEMBER.
Present: Sh. Sandeep Sharma, Adv. for complainant.
Opposite party no. 1 and 2 given up vide order dated 04.05.2023.
Opposite party no. 3 to 7 already exparte vide order dated 01.03.2021.
ORDER
NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT:
1. Brief facts of the case as per complainant are that the respondent No. 1 launched a housing project in the name of “Balmont Park” vide which it was publicized that the flats will be constructed by the respondent No. 1. The concerned persons on behalf of the company showed the big dreams to the investors and allured the innocent applicants to invest the amount in the project of the opposite party No. 1. The complainant accordingly booked a flat with the opposite party No. 1 and deposited the initial amount of Rs. 5,00,000/- (Rs. Five Lakhs) i.e. booking amount and accordingly a receipt was issued by the opposite party No: 1 vide receipt No. 1904 dated 14/4/2014. Upon the application and booking of the complainant the opposite party No. 1 had issued/alloted a Flat No. G 01-602 at Grace Apartment, 6th Floor, Belmont Park, Village Kellod Hala, Near IDA's, SCM, Part II. Indore MP 452001. On the receipt of the application amount an allotment letter dated 14/4/2014 was issued to the complainant and total basic value of the said apartment/flat was shown in the said agreement as Rs.33,55,116/-. That the complainant in pursuance of the allotment letter issued by the opposite party, applied for a loan of Rs 26,84,092/- from HDFC Bank, Model Town, Rohtak Branch and the Bank had sanctioned loan of Rs. 24,15,683/- vide loan account No. 611060920 and the amount was disbursed vide cheque No. 111499 dated 9/5/2014 in the account of opposite party No. 1 having Account No. 2455020000555 with Bank of Baroda, Indore branch. In this manner an amount of Rs.29,15,683/- had been paid on behalf of the complainant to the opposite party No. 1 in lieu of the aforesaid apartment/flat. The complainant after making the aforesaid payment requested the opposite parties to give possession of the aforesaid flat time and again, but the complainant's genuine request was not accepted as the project was incomplete for the reasons best known to them. Complainant also served a legal notices to opposite parties twice. In the reply sent on behalf of the opposite parties through their counsel, they claimed the external maintenance charges as well service tax and wrongly claimed the total amount of Rs.35,27,177/- against the cost of the aforesaid flat. Further they have asserted that they have not received the earnest/token amount of Rs 5,00,000/-. Had there been any such position in that case why they issued the receipt and subsequently issued allotment letter in favour of the complainant without receiving the application money. If the application money was not received then why the allotment letter was issued and why an amount of Rs. 24,15,683/- was received by the company from the complainant on account of remaining cost of the flat/apartment in the month of May, 2014? Vide reply dated 29/7/2019 the complainant was further called upon to pay the aforesaid alleged amount of Rs 11,11,494/- along with interest within 7 days from the date of receipt of the reply and to take possession of the said flat and get the legal documentation done. On receipt of reply of the respondents, the complainant himself visited Indore (Madhya Pradesh) to reveal the truth on 10/12/2019 and found that no office of the company was there and he came to know that the apartment/flat allotted of the complainant had already been sold and executed a title deed in respect of the flat No. G-01/602 in favour of Sh. Anand Chokse and ors. on dated 19.02.2018 vide e-registration no. MP179142018A1108040. The complainant served upon the respondents a representation-cum-final notice dated 14/5/2020 & reminders and called upon the respondents to refund the entire amount received by the respondents from the complainant along with interest but till date no reply has been received on behalf of the respondents. As such, the act and conduct of the opposite parties is illegal and amounts to deficiency in service. Hence this complaint and it is prayed that opposite parties may kindly be directed to refund the amount of Rs.29,15,683/- alongwith 15% p.a. from the date of deposit to till the date of return by the opposite parties and also to pay an appropriate amount to the complainant on account of compensation and Rs.44,000/- as litigation charges to the complainant.
2. After registration of complaint, notices were issued to the opposite parties. Opposite parties no. 1 and 2 were given up by learned counsel for the complainant vide statement dated 04.05.2023. However notices were issued to opposite parties no. 3 to 7 received back with the report of refusal. As such, they were proceeded against exparte vide order dated 01.03.2021 of this Commission.
3. Learned counsel for the complainant in his evidence has tendered affidavit Ex. CW-1/A, documents Ex. C1 to Ex. C17 and closed the evidence vide separate statement dated 04.05.2023.
4. We have heard learned counsel for the complainant and have gone through material aspects of the case very carefully.
5. As per the allotment letter Ex.C1 dated 14.04.2014 the apartment no.G01/602, at Grace Apartment, 6th Floor was allotted to the complainant. As per the allotment letter, total cost of the apartment is Rs.3355116/-. As per the complainant he deposited the booking amount of Rs. 5,00,000/- against the receipt No. 1904 dated 14/4/2014 and further took a loan from the HDFC bank and a loan of Rs.2415683/- has been transferred in the loan account of the complainant bearing no.611060920. Complainant had make the payment of alleged amount of Rs.2415683/- to the respondent vide cheque no.111499 dated 09.05.2014 and the above said amount has been transferred in the account of opposite parties in lieu of apartment/flat no.G01/602. The flat in question was allotted to the complainant vide allotment letter dated 14.04.2014 but till date possession has not been handed over to the complainant after repeated requests and reminders. The complainant also placed on record document Ex.C18, the loan account statement for the period 01.04.2014 to 31.03.2023. The perusal of this statement shows that complainant has repaid the whole loan amount during the financial year 01.04.2021 to 31.03.2022. We have also perused the loan account statement from the period 01.04.2023 to 04.08.2023. In this statement the opening balance is mentioned as Zero and receivable amount is also mentioned as Zero. Meaning thereby the complainant has repaid the whole loan amount to HDFC Bank. The perusal of Ex.C16 and Ex.C17 shows that the above mentioned flat has been sold by the respondents to one Sh. Anand Chokse and a fraud has been committed with the complainant by the builders and working directors. But till date the amount has not been refunded to the complainant. Moreover, it is also on record that opposite parties No.3 to 7 did not appear despite service and were proceeded against exparte. As such it is presumed that they have nothing to say in the matter and all the allegations leveled by the complainant against the opposite parties stands proved and there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties. Hence the opposite parties No. 3 to 7 jointly and severally are liable to refund of amount deposited by him with them.
6. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, we hereby allow the complaint and direct the opposite parties no.3 to 7 jointly and severally to refund the amount of Rs.2915683/-(Rupees twenty nine lac fifteen thousand six hundred and eighty three only) alongwith interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of their respective payments to the opposite parties till its realization and shall also pay a sum of Rs.25000/-(Rupees twenty five thousand only) as compensation on account of deficiency in service and Rs.5000/-(Rupees five thousand only) as litigation expenses to the complainant within one month from the date of decision, failing which opposite parties shall be liable to pay interest @ 12% p.a. on the awarded amount of Rs.2915683/-(Rupees twenty nine lac fifteen thousand six hundred and eighty three only) from the date of their respective payments till its realization to the complainant.
7. Copy of this order be supplied to both the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.
Announced in open court:
23.08.2023
................................................
Nagender Singh Kadian, President
..........................................
Tripti Pannu, Member.
…………………………..
Vijender Singh, Member
