THE DISTT. CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, ROPAR
Consumer Complaint No. 86 of 23.07.2019
Date of decision : 07.02.2022
Amarjeet Kaur aged about 44 years, wife of Gurwinder Singh, resident of Near Gugamari Chowk, Ward No.2, Nalagarh, Tehsil Nalagarh, District Solan (Himachal Pradesh)
......Complainant
Versus
M/s Nature Heights Infra Limited, Head Office, 9, Sunder Nagri, Opposite Children Park, Hanumangarh Road, Abohar, District Fazilka (Pb.) through Chief Manager Director Neeraj Thatai alias Neeraj Arora.
Jasvir Singh Branch Manager, M/s Nature Heights Infra Limited, Nuhon Colony, Village & PO Ghanauli, Tehsil & District Rupnagar.
....Opposite Parties
Complaint under Section Consumer Protection Act
QUORUM
SH. RANJIT SINGH, PRESIDENT
SMT. RANVIR KAUR, MEMBER
ARGUED BY
Sh. Amandeep Saini, Adv. counsel for complainant
O.Ps. exparte
ORDER
SH. RANJIT SINGH, PRESIDENT
1. Complainant has filed the present complaint seeking directions to the opposite parties to refund the amount of Rs.16,500/- along with interest @ 16% per annum; to pay Rs.20,000/- as compensation on account of unfair trade practice and deficiency in service; to pay Rs.20,000/- as litigation charges along with the interest @ 18% per annum from the date of agreement till its realization in the interest of justice.
2. Brief facts made out from the complaint are that the O.Ps. are running the business of Real Estate, constructing flats, developing colonies and selling the plots etc. on profit basis. In addition to that they are also running the deposit business like banks, financial institutions. The OP No.1 is the Chief Managing Director and the OP No.2 is the Branch Manager of the M/s Nature Heights Infra Limited having its office at Nuhon Colony, VPO Ghanauli, Tehsil & District Rupnagar. The O.Ps. attracted the general public at large by giving advertisement on the cable network and News papers etc. that they were going to present Nature Greens as Premium Residential Township in the form of a colony in Nagpur and they further advertised that they will give 16% interest per annum on the investment in the plots of the project. On the allurement of O.Ps, the complainant also booked one plot of 2376 Sq. Feet on the installment basis of Rs.5500/- per year. The total tenure of installments was of six years. Complainant paid the three installments of Rs.5500/- each in Ropar Branch with the O.P. No.2 on different dates. As per the terms and conditions of that agreement, the total period of payment was of six years. As per the agreement after the expiry of stipulated period the complainant asked for the physical possession of the property. Thereafter complainant visited the proposed site and was shocked to know that there is no construction/demarcation of the plots in the said land. Even there was no boundary wall of the said land and the land was empty and complainant approached to the O.Ps and request for refund the amount of Rs.16,500/- along with interest as per agreement but the O.Ps. did not refund the amount. Hence, this complaint.
3. On being put to the notice, none appeared on behalf of O.Ps. No.1 & 2. Even publication proceedings were completed against the said OPs but despite service by way of publication, neither the OPs nor anybody else has appeared on their behalf. Accordingly, they were proceeded against exparte.
4. On being called upon to do so, the learned counsel for the complainant has tendered duly sworn affidavit of complainant Ex.CW1/A along with documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C4 and closed the evidence.
5. We have heard the learned counsel for the complainant and have gone through the record of the file, carefully.
6. Complainant counsel Sh. Amandeep Saini, argued that complainant is the consumer, sufficient evidence is on the file regarding deposit and O.Ps. were proceeded against ex-parte. The complaint deserves to be allowed with costs.
7. Complainant counsel referred the pleadings, receipts Ex.C1 to Ex.C3, vide which complainant deposited Rs.16,500/- on different dates.
8. After referring the above said part of agreement, complainant counsel made prayer that the O.Ps. neither cleared the title nor obtained NOC even not made income tax clearance. When situation is such then complainant stopped further deposit of monthly installment and prayed deficiency is made out and the complaint deserves to be allowed.
9. After appreciating the totality of the document and appreciating the evidence, complainant deposited Rs.16,500. O.Ps. did not appear despite notice and were proceeded against exparte. Qua the fraud committed some consumers got registered FIR No.59 dated 3.6.2016 against the O.Ps and its copy is Ex.C4. So complainant is able to prove deficiency on the part of O.Ps. regarding the payment of Rs.16,500/-. So, the complainant is held entitled to Rs.16,500/-. The responsibilities of the O.Ps. is joint because OP No.2 acted though in the capacity of Manager on behalf of O.P. No.1. They are liable to pay jointly and severally.
10. In the light of discussion made above, the complaint stands allowed ex-parte with the directions to the O.Ps. to pay Rs.16,500/- to the complainant along with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of deposit i.e. Rs.5500/- on 21.09.2014, Rs.5500/- on 18.10.2013, Rs.5500/- on 16.09.2012 . The Ops are further directed to pay a compensation and litigation expenses of Rs.20,000/- to the complainant. The OPs be also directed to comply with the order jointly and severally within the period of 30 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.
11. The certified copies of this order be supplied to the parties forthwith, free of costs, as permissible under the rules and the file be indexed and consigned to Record Room.
ANNOUNCED (RANJIT SINGH)
Dated.07.02.2022 PRESIDENT
(RANVIR KAUR)
MEMBER
