DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SAHIBZADA AJIT SINGH NAGAR (MOHALI)
Consumer Complaint No.433 of 2016 Date of institution: 22.07.2016 Date of decision : 26.10.2017
Inderjit Kaur wife of Amrik Singh, resident of # 96, Batha Colony, Mukerian, District Hoshiarpur, Punjab.
……..Complainant
Versus
1. M/s. Nature Heights Infra Limited through its Director/Authorised Representative, Regd. Office # 9, Sunder Nagar, Hanumangarh Road, Abohar (Pb.).
IInd Site Address: Jhuggian Road, Sector 125, Mohali.
2. M/s. Nature Heights Infra Limited, through its Chief Managing Director (CMD), Neeraj Arora, Regd. # 9, Sunder Nagar, Hanumangarh Road, Abohar (Pb.).
IInd Address: Gali No.12, South Venue, Abohar.
3. Parmod Nagpal, Managing Director, M/s. Nature Heights Infra Limited # 9, Sunder Nagar, Hanumangarh Road, Abohar (Pb.).
4. M/s. Nature Heights Infra Limited through its Director Gaurav Chabra, # 9, Sunder Nagar, Hanumangarh Road, Abohar (Pb.).
5. Raji Chug (Partner) M/s. Nature Heights Infra Limited r/o Ridhi Sidhi Colony, Ganga Nagar Road, Abohar.
IInd Address: Site Address: M/s. Nature Heights Infra Limited, Jhuggian Road, Sector 125, Mohali.
6. A.K. Singh (Partner), M/s. Nature Heights Limited, SCO 32 (Basement) Phase-1, Mohali.
………. Opposite Parties
Complaint under Section 12 of the
Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
Quorum
Shri Ajit Pal Singh Rajput, President Mrs. Natasha Chopra, Member.
Present: Shri Nitin Verma, counsel for the complainant.
OPs ex-parte
ORDER
By Ajit Pal Singh Rajput, President
Complainant Inderjit Kaur has filed the present complaint against the Opposite Party (hereinafter referred to as the OP) under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act. The brief facts of the complaint are as under:
2. The complainant booked a plot in the housing colony of the OPs namely Unitown in village Bringali, Talwara, Tehsil Mukerian, District Hoshiarpur. The size of the booked plot was 1500 sq. ft. bearing ID No.10031861 and application No.49371. The complainant was required to pay four yearly installments of the plot @ Rs.65,625/-/. The first installment of Rs.62,703/- was paid by the complainant vide receipt dated 30.04.2012. Booking letter was received by the complainant on 26.06.2012. The complainant paid the second installment of Rs.65,625/- as per schedule on 19.06.2013 at SAS Nagar office of the OPs vide receipt No.154522. However, even after lapse of two years period, there was no development at the site at Talwara. The complainant submitted application form No.250676 with the OPs for getting the agreement and for adding the name of Gurjinder Singh son of Darshan Lal resident of 4080-B, Sector 37-C, Chandigarh as co-applicant No objection certificate in the shape of affidavit of the complainant was also submitted with the OPs. After lot of visits of the complainant at Mohali and telephone calls at Abohar office of the OPs, the agreement of sale was executed at Abohar on 15.09.2015 and the complainant collected the agreement from Mohali office of the OPs. However, in the agreement, the name of complainant was wrongly mentioned as Inderjit Kaur wife of Late Tarlok Raj Oberoi which was intimated to the OPs. It was provided in the agreement that if the project is not completed within 4 years from the date of purchase the amount would be refunded alongwith interest @ 13%. The complainant has come to know that the OPs have played fraud with the complainant and also they did not obtain necessary approvals before carving out proposed colony and were not compete to sell the plots. Hence, this complaint for giving directions to the OPs to refund Rs.1,31,250/- alongwith interest @ 13% per annum from the dates of payment till realisation; to pay her Rs.2,00,000/- on account of deficiency in service and unfair trade practice and Rs.50,000/- as costs of litigation.
3. Shri Jatinder Arora, Advocate appeared on behalf of OP No.5 on 30.09.2016 and filed memo of appearance and sought adjournment for filing POA and reply. Thereafter neither the POA nor reply on behalf of OP No.5 filed and none appeared on behalf of OP No.5, it was proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated 14.12.2016. OP No.1,2,3,4 and 6 did not appear in this Forum despite publication in the newspaper. Hence, these OPs were also proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated 27.03.2017.
4. In order to prove the case, the counsel tendered in evidence affidavit of the complainant Ex.CW-1/1; copies of receipt Ex.C-1; booking letter Ex.C-2; receipt Ex.C-3; application form Ex.C-4 and agreement to sell Ex.C-5.
5. The learned counsel for the complainant has argued that the complainant booked 1500 sq. ft. plot with the OPs in its project named Unitown, Talwara and paid Rs. 1,31,250/- vide two receipts Ex.C-1 and C-3 against the total price of the plot of Rs.2,62,500/-. Learned counsel has submitted that there is no development at the site and as per the condition mentioned in the agreement that if the project is not completed within 4 years the complainant is entitled to refund of the amount deposited alongwith interest @ 13% per annum and also the complainant deserves compensation for mental agony, harassment and costs of litigation.
6. After hearing the learned counsel for the complainant and going through the pleadings, evidence and the written as well as oral submissions, it is established that the complainant booked the 1500 sq. plot with the OPs vide ID No.10031861 and booking letter dated 26.06.2012 was duly issued by the OPs. The sale consideration of the plot was to be paid in four installments. The complainant paid first installment of Rs.65,625/- vide receipt dated 30.04.2012 Ex.C-1. Thereafter, second installment of Rs.65,625/- was also paid by the complainant vide receipt dated 19.06.2013 Ex.C-3. Agreement for sale Ex.C-5 was executed between the complainant and the OPs on 15.09.2015. The complainant has stated that there is no development at the site and as per condition mentioned in the agreement Ex.C-5 she is entitled to refund of the amount deposited by her with the OPs vide receipts Ex.C-1 and C-3. The OP No.5 initially put in appearance through counsel but did not file POA and reply nor evidence and OP No.5 was proceeded against ex-parte. OP No.1, 2, 3, 4 and 6 did not appeared despite publication. The whole purpose of pleadings is to give fair notice to each party of what the opponent’s case is and to ascertain with precision the point(s) on which the parties argue and those on which they differ. The purpose is to eradicate irrelevancy. The complaint is a concise statement of facts and if no reply is filed to the complaint, the averments made therein are deemed to have been admitted. No amount of evidence can be looked into upon a plea, which was never put forward in pleadings. As such, the evidence adduced by the complainant remains unrebutted. As stipulated in the agreement, the complainant is entitled to refund of amount alongwith interest @ 13% per annum from the dates of deposit till realisation.
7. Accordingly, in view of our aforesaid discussion, we direct the OP to refund to the complainant Rs.1,31,250/- (Rs. One Lakh Thirty One Thousand Two Hundred Fifty only) alongwith interest @ 13% per annum from the dates of respective deposits till actual payment. We also find that complainant is entitled to a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rs. Twenty five thousand only) on account of mental agony due to the negligent act of the OPs and litigation cost of Rs.10,000/- (Rs. Ten thousand only). The present complaint stands allowed accordingly.
The OPs are further directed to comply with the order of this Forum within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order failing which the amount of compensation shall carry interest @ 13% per annum from the date of decision till actual payment.
The arguments on the complaint were heard and the order was reserved. Now the order be communicated to the parties. Copy of the order be sent to the parties free of cost and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room.
Pronounced
Dated: 26.10.2017
(A.P.S.Rajput)
President
(Mrs. Natasha Chopra)
Member
