THE DISTT. CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, ROPAR
Consumer Complaint No. 85 of 23.07.2019
Date of decision : 07.02.2022
Paramjeet Kaur, aged about 61 years, wife of Shingara Singh, resident of House No.4972, Jagjit Nagar, Rupnagar, Tehsil & District Rupnagar (Punjab)
......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 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.28,000/- 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, O.P. 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.P. No.1 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 Nagpur and they further advertised that they would give 16% interest per annum on the investment in the plots of the project. It is further stated that O.Ps. induced the general public to book the plots with them in the said colony. On the allurement of O.Ps, the complainant also booked one plot of 5809 Sq. Feet on the installment basis of Rs.1120/- per month. The total tenure of the installments was of six years and the total installments were 72 installments of Rs.1120/-. Complainant paid the 25 installments in Ropar Branch with the O.P. No.2 on different dates. Thereafter complainant came to know that the Ops company has committed a big fraud with the complainant and people at large. The complainant approached to the O.Ps at their office and request for refund the amount of Rs.28,000/- 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, accordingly, they were proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated 02.07.2021.
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.C21 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.C20, vide which complainant deposited Rs.22400/- on different dates. Then there is one FIR Ex.C21.
8. After appreciating the totality of the document and appreciating the arguments, complainant deposited Rs.22,400/-. In this way, the complainant is the consumer O.Ps did not make any improvement as per the agreement then complainant filed the complaint in the month of July 2019. 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.C11. So complainant is able to prove deficiency on the part of O.Ps. regarding the payment of Rs.22400/-. So, the complainant is held entitled to Rs.22400/-. 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.
9. In the light of discussion made above, the complaint stands allowed ex-parte with the directions to the O.Ps. to pay Rs.22,400/- to the complainant along with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of deposit i.e. Rs.1120/- on 18.09.2013, Rs.1120/- on 20.03.2014, Rs.1120/- on 20.03.2014, Rs.1120/- on 25.03.2014, Rs.1120/- on 24.05.2014, Rs.1120/- on 01.07.2014, Rs.1120/- on 22.07.2014, Rs.1120/- on 23.08.2014, Rs.1120/- on 23.09.2014, Rs.1120/- on 03.11.2014, Rs.1120/- on 23.12.2014, Rs.1120/- on 23.01.2015, Rs.1120/- on 27.02.2015, Rs.1120/- on 24.03.2015, Rs.1120/- on 24.04.2015, Rs.1120/- on 26.05.2015 Rs.1120/- on 26.6.2015, Rs.1120/- on 29.08.2015, Rs.1120/- on 29.08.2015, Rs.1120/- on 06.10.2015 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 said order within the period of 30 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.
10. The O.Ps. are further directed to comply with the order jointly and severally within the period of two months 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
