Punjab

Faridkot

CC/16/111

Jarnail Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s Nature Farms and Real Estate Pvt. Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Atul Gupta

17 Jun 2016

ORDER

     DISTRICT  CONSUMER   DISPUTES   REDRESSAL   FORUM,   FARIDKOT

 

Complaint No. :       111

Date of Institution :  26.04.2016

Date of Decision :    17.06.2016

Jarnail Singh aged about 45 years s/o Mohinder Singh r/o Village & Post Office Bargari, Tehsil Jaitu, District Faridkot.                                                                                 

...Complainant

Versus

1. M/s Nature Farms & Real Estates Pvt Ltd having its Registered Office at J-32, First Floor, Nazafgarh Road, Ramesh Nagar, New Delhi, through its Managing Director Neeraj Arora.

2. Neeraj Arora, Managing Director for M/s Nature Farms & Real Estates Pvt Ltd having its Registered Office at J-32, First Floor, Nazafgarh Road, Ramesh Nagar, New Delhi;

   Both OP-1 and 2 are now residing at Street No. 9, Sunder Nagri, Hanumangarh Road, Abohar.

3. M/s Nature Farm and Real Estates Pvt Ltd through its Branch Manager, Near Bus Stand, Faridkot. Now at present at Street No. 9, Sunder Nagri, Hanumangarh Road, Abohar.

                                              ........ OPs

    

   Complaint under Section 12 of the

   Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

    

   Quorum:     Sh. Ajit Aggarwal, President,

   Smt Parampal Kaur, Member,

   Sh P Singla, Member.

    

   Present:       Sh Atul Gupta, Adv. Ld Counsel for Complainant,

                         OPs-Exparte.

    

   (Ajit Aggarwal,  President)

                      Complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against Ops seeking directions to refund the amount of Rs.50,000/-with interest besides Rs.50,000/-as compensation for harassment and mental agony alongwith litigation expenses of Rs.15,000/-.

   2                                  Briefly stated the case of complainant is that Ops launched a project at Village Darbaan Khaas, Tehsil and District Pathankot representing and holding it to be a developing project and believing on assurance given by officials of OPs, complainant applied to Ops for booking of 6 marlas of land out of land comprised in Khasra numbers as mentioned in expression of interest cum agreement dt 26.09.2014 and paid an amount of Rs.50,000/- in cash at Faridkot, which was duly received by OPs.  Agreement between complainant and OPs was executed at Faridkot through their official namely Iqbal Singh s/o Mohinder Singh having ID No. 4194. Complainant agreed to purchase the said property to earn his livelihood and as per agreement dt 26.09.2014 OPs were bound to obtain all kinds of NOC, permissions and income tax clearances before the time of registration of property, but despite the fact that complainant had always ready and willing to get the sale deed executed and registered in their favour, but due to non completion of legal formalities, OPs failed to do same and also failed to deliver the possession of plot to complainant. It was stipulated in the agreement that purchaser would receive Rs.6,500/-per year as lease rent in respect of his agriculture land and OPs gave him only one instalment and thereafter gave nothing. Complainant used to demand the amount of lease and had been requesting them to execute and register the sale deed in his favour, but Ops kept putting off the complainant on one pretext or the other. Complainant personally went to Village Darbaan Khaas to get the land demarcated and to verify the title of land involved in the expression of interest cum agreement and also met officials of OPs with request to do the needful, but they told that they could not do anything regarding agreement in question. Complainant asked OPs to hand over the requisite permission obtained by them from Government Authorities regarding project situated at village Darbaan Khass, District Pathankot, but OPs showed inability to produce any such permission, whereas as  per latest pronouncement of Hon’ble Apex Commission, it has been held that at the time of floating such like schemes, OPs should have obtained requisite permission and infrastructure, but till date Ops have not obtained any such permission from Government Authorities. As per agreement, OPs have not developed the site yet. Complainant visited the office of OPs at Faridkot and requested them to show requisite permission and necessary certificates, but all in vain and apprehending wrong, when complainant requested OPs to return their principal amount, they did not pay any heed to his requests. Complainant approached Ops many times with request to refund his amount with interest, but every time they kept putting off the matter on one pretext or the other. Ops kept the complainant in dark as they have not taken any permission for floating such scheme. This act of OPs has caused financial loss, great harassment and mental tension to complainant, which amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. Complainant has prayed for directing OPs to refund the amount of Rs.50,000/- with interest and has also prayed for compensation of Rs.50,000/- besides Rs.15,000/- as cost of litigation. Hence, the complaint.

   3                        The Counsel for complainant was heard with regard to admission of the complaint and vide order dated 4.05.2016, complaint was admitted and notice was ordered to be issued to the opposite parties.

   4                                  As per office report, notice issued to Ops stands served, but despite service of notice, nobody appeared on behalf of them either in person or through counsel, therefore, all  OP-1 to 3 were proceeded against Ex-parte vide order dt 13.06.2016.

   5                                  Ld Counsel for complainant tendered in exparte evidence, affidavit of complainant as Ex.C-1, affidavit of Iqbal Singh as Ex C-3 and documents Ex C-2 and C-4 and then, closed the evidence on behalf of complainant.

   6                                              In exparte arguments, ld counsel for complainant contended that Ops launched a project at Village Darbaan Khaas, Tehsil and District Pathankot representing it to be a developing project and believing on assurance of OPs, complainant applied for booking of 6 marlas of land out of land comprised in Khasra numbers as mentioned in expression of interest cum agreement dt 26.09.2014 and paid an amount of Rs.50,000/-in cash. Agreement between complainant and OPs was executed at Faridkot through their official namely Iqbal Singh s/o Mohinder Singh having ID No. 4194 and complainant agreed to purchase the said property to earn his livelihood and as per agreement dt 26.09.2014 OPs were bound to obtain all kinds of NOC, permissions and income tax clearances before the time of registration of property, but OPs failed to do so and also failed to deliver the possession of plot to complainant. It was also stipulated that purchaser would receive Rs.6,500/-per year as lease rent in respect of his agriculture land, but OPs gave him only one instalment and thereafter gave nothing. Complainant requested OPs to execute and register the sale deed in his favour, but Ops kept putting him off on one pretext or the other. Complainant personally went to Village Darbaan Khaas to get the land demarcated and to verify the title of land involved in the expression of interest cum agreement and also met officials of OPs with request to do the needful, but they showed inability to do anything in this regard. Complainant asked OPs to hand over the requisite permission obtained by them from Government Authorities regarding project situated at village Darbaan Khass, District Pathankot, but OPs did not produce any such permission, whereas as per latest pronouncement of Hon’ble Apex Commission, it has been held that at the time of floating such like schemes, OPs should have obtained requisite permission and infrastructure, but till date Ops have not obtained any such permission from Government Authorities. As per agreement, OPs have not developed the site yet. Complainant visited the office of OPs at Faridkot and requested them to show requisite permission and necessary certificates, but all in vain and apprehending wrong, when complainant requested OPs to return the principal amount, they did not pay any heed to his requests. Complainant made may requests to refund his amount with interest, but every time they kept putting off the matter on one pretext or the other. Ops kept the complainant in dark as they have not taken any permission for floating such scheme. All this amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. Complainant has prayed for accepting the present complaint. In order to prove that  this Forum has jurisdiction to decide the present complaint, ld counsel for complainant has placed reliance on citation in case law 2014 (2) Consumer Law Today titled as Ms Dilshad Gill Vs M/s EMAAR MGF Land Pvt Ltd & Ors, wherein Hon’ble Chandigarh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, U T Chandigarh has observed that Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 11-Territorial Jurisdiction-Flat at Chandigarh-Apart of Cause of action, accrued to the complainant at Chandigarh and as such, this Commission has the territorial jurisdiction to entertain and decide the complaint. In present case also, the payment is received by Ops from complainant at Faridkot  as per Expression of Interest-cum-Agreement dated 26.09.2014. It is further argued that Ops received payment at Faridkot and agreement in question is also executed between parties at Faridkot.

   7                                   We have heard the exparte arguments addressed by ld counsel for complainant and have also carefully gone through the record available on the file.

   8                                        From the careful examination of document Ex C-2, which is Expression of Interest cum Agreement dt 26.09.2014, it is clear that Ops received amount of Rs.50,000/-from complainant. On the face of it, this document proves that complainant made payment of huge amount of Rs.50,000/-to OPs, which was duly received by them. This Agreement of sale is executed in favour of complainant, which clears the point that in lieu of receiving payment of Rs50,000/- from complainants, Ops entered into an agreement with complainant and both the complainant party as well as Ops are bound by the terms and conditions of same. This document gives strength to the pleading of complainant that he paid the amount of Rs50,000/- through the agent of Ops namely Iqbal Singh, whose affidavit Ex C-3 is also placed on record by complainant. Documents Ex C-2 and C-3 are cogent evidence, authenticity of which cannot be ignored. Through Ex C-1 complainant has reiterated his pleadings and it explains the grievance of complainant.

   9                             The main contention of complainants is that complainant paid Rs50,000/-to Ops, but in turn Ops neither paid any interest to complainant nor gave possession of any plot as per their earlier promise, thereby depriving them of the interest on principal amount of Rs50,000/-, which is a trade mal practice on the part of Ops and amounts to clear cut deficiency in service. It is observed that agreement between complainant and Ops is executed in their office at Faridkot and payment is also made at Faridkot, which falls within the territorial jurisdiction of this Forum and therefore, this Forum is fully competent to settle the dispute arisen under its territorial jurisdiction. Moreover, payment is made on 26.09.2014 at Faridkot in the office of Ops and thus, limitation of complainant for filing the present complaint can also not be denied. We fully agree with the arguments advanced by complainant counsel.

   10                                              All these documents prove that Ops have been deficient in services and they did not come up to fulfil the terms of deed, which is evident from Ex C-2. All this proves that Ops have caused great harassment to complainant by retaining his large amount of Rs.50,000/-depriving him of the interest, which was to be accrued on it. All this has caused harassment and mental tension to complainant, which entitles him for compensation and litigation expenses.

   11                                          From the careful perusal of the record and keeping in view the citation placed by complainant titled as Ms Dilshad Gill Vs M/s EMAAR MGF Land Pvt Ltd & Ors (supra) and documents placed on file, this Forum is fully convinced with the arguments advanced by ld counsel for complainant and is of considered opinion that OPs have been deficient in providing services and there is trade mal practice on the part of OPs in not handing over the possession of plot as per their promise and also failed to return the amount of Rs.50,000/- received from complainant. Hence, the present complaint is hereby allowed. OPs are directed to refund the amount of Rs.50,000/-to complainant with interest at the rate of 12% per anum from the date of payment till realization. Ops are further directed to pay Rs.5,000/-as compensation for harassment and mental agony suffered by him besides Rs 3000/-as litigation expenses to complainant. OP are directed to comply with the order within one month from the date of receipt of the copy of this order, failing which complainant shall be entitled to proceed under Section 25 and 27 of the Consumer Protection Act. Copy of order be supplied to the parties free of costs under the rules. File be consigned to record room.

   Announced in Open Forum

   Dated : 17.06.2016

                                            Member            Member                  President

             (P Singla)          (Parampal Kaur)     (Ajit Aggarwal)