Date of Filing:18.07.2007<br /> Date of Order: 10.06.2008<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> BEFORE THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM SESHADRIPURAM BANGALORE-20<br /> <br /> Dated: 10TH DAY OF JUNE 2008<br /> PRESENT<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Sri. S.S. NAGARALE, B.A, LL.B. (SPL.), President.<br /> Smt. D. LEELAVATHI, M.A.LL.B, Member.<br /> Sri. BALAKRISHNA. V. MASALI, B.A, LL.B. (SPL.), Member.<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> COMPLAINT NO: 1496 OF 2007 <br /> <br /> S.C. Mahesh Kumar,<br /> S/o S. Chandrashekar,<br /> No.19(New) 10(Old),<br /> Veeraswamy Street,<br /> West Mambalam, <br /> Chennai-600 033. Complainant<br /> COMPLAINT NO: 1497 OF 2007 <br /> <br /> S.C. Subramanian,<br /> S/o S. Chandrashekar,<br /> No.19(New) 10(Old),<br /> Veeraswamy Street,<br /> West Mambalam, <br /> Chennai-600 033. Complainant<br /> <br /> COMPLAINT NO: 1498 OF 2007 <br /> <br /> S.C. Shreedhar,<br /> S/o S. Chandrashekar,<br /> No.19(New) 10(Old),<br /> Veeraswamy Street,<br /> West Mambalam, <br /> Chennai-600 033. Complainant<br /> <br /> V/S<br /> <br /> 1. M/s Omkar Estate Private Limited,<br /> No. 64/1, S.M. Plaza,<br /> DVG Road, Bangalore-560 004.<br /> 2. K.R. Suresh Kumar,<br /> No.4/22, Shreyas,<br /> Puttanna Road,<br /> Basavanagudi,<br /> Bangalore-560 004.<br /> <br /> 3. N.V. Ashwathanarayana Setty,<br /> No.406, 3rd ‘B’ Cross,<br /> 4th ‘T’ Block, Jayanagar,<br /> Bangalore-560 041. Opposite Parties<br /> <br /> <br /> ORDER<br /> By the President, Sri. S.S. Nagarale<br /> <br /> These three complaints are clubbed together for disposal since the question of law and facts involved in all the three cases are one and the same and the opposite party in all the three cases is one and the same. Three these complaints can conveniently be disposed of by common order. The main order will be kept in complaint No.1496/2007 and copy will be kept in other two connected complaints. <br /> The respective complainants have filed U/Sec.12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 claiming refund of amount paid with interest and compensation and alternatively direction to the opposite parties to deliver possession of the schedule property and for payment of compensation.<br /> The complainants stated that, they have become member of Omkar Estates Pvt. Ltd., and paid total sum of Rs.87,500/- towards site measuring 30 X 40 feet at Omkar Nagar, Hosahalli, Amanikere, Hennagara village, Jigani Hobli, Anekal Taluk, Bangalore. The opposite parties No.2 and 3 are the Directors of opposite party No.1. The opposite parties have sent photo copies of the DD for Rs. 87,500/- with letter styled as cancellation of membership asking the complainants to execute the letter. The complainants have not signed the letter. Therefore, the opposite parties have not sent the DD to the complainants. The opposite parties have also promised cash certificate of Rs.1,00,000/- or fixed deposit receipt at the end of the scheme encashable after 15 years. The complainants have sought that the opposite parties be directed to deliver the possession of the schedule property and they may be directed to execute sale deed in favour of the complainants. <br /> 2. Notice was issued to opposite parties. Opposite party No.1 remained absent in spite of service of notice and opposite party No.2 and 3 present and filed defence version. Admittedly, the Omkar Estates is a private limited company. They have also admitted that scheme was formulated for allotment of sites. They have also admitted that the complainants have paid Rs.87,500/-. They have also admitted that they have sent Xerox copies of the DD along with letter to the complainants and the complainants had agreed to receive the amount. The complainants failed to give consent and cancellation letter was not signed. It is the case of the opposite parties that the lands were registered in the name of various Directors who failed to transfer the land in the name of the company. Therefore, the company was unable to form the layout. The opposite parties have submitted that complainants are entitled for refund of the amount. <br /> 3. Affidavit evidence of both the parties filed. Arguments are heard. <br /> 4. In the light of the argument advanced, the following points arise for my consideration. <br /> 1. Whether the opposite parties shall be directed to <br /> refund the amount with interest?<br /> 2. Whether the complainants are entitled for compensation?<br /> <br /> <br /> REASONS<br /> 5. All most all the facts are admitted. There is no dispute in these cases. The respective complainants have paid Rs.87,500/- to the opposite parties. The opposite parties have sent a letter on 21/4/2007 to the complainants along with Xerox copy of the DD for Rs.87,500/-. The opposite parties asked the complainants to sign the letter of cancellation of membership and thereafter they have agreed to refund the amount of Rs.87,500/- to the respective complainants. In the defence version also the opposite parties have clearly admitted receipt of Rs.87,500/- from the respective complainants. The opposite parties have also stated in the defence version that the complainants are entitled for refund of the amount. So, in view of admitted facts, it is not necessary to discuss in detail. The learned advocate for the complainants fairly submitted during the course of argument that the opposite parties may be directed to refund the amount with interest and compensation. As per the deed of allotment executed by opposite parties at clause(7) it is stated that, “If the company fails to execute the sale deed and complete the layout as stated above, after payment of entire amount by the ALLOTTEE, the company shall refund the amount with interest at 18% p.a.” As per this deed of allotment itself the opposite party company had agreed for payment of 18% interest. The Hon’ble National Commission also directing the Housing Societies to pay interest at 18% p.a. on the deposit amount. The opposite party company had made use of the amount with a promise that, they will form the layout and allot the sites, but for the internal problem of the company the opposite party company could not form the layout and sites were not allotted to the respective members. Therefore, the company has to refund the amount with interest. In this case, grant of interest at 18% p.a. is quite just and proper. It is common knowledge that the prices of the sites in and around Bangalore have increased abnormally. It is very difficult for a common man to get sites at a reasonable price. Therefore, on account of escalation of prices of the sites it is fair, just and proper to order the opposite party company and its Directors to pay compensation of Rs.50,000/- to each of the complainants apart from deposit and interest. In the result, I proceed to pass the following:-<br /> ORDER<br /> <br /> 6. All the complaints are allowed. The opposite parties are directed to pay Rs.87,500/- to the respective complainants. The opposite parties are directed to pay interest at 18% p.a on the said amount from 10/10/2000(from the date of payment) till realization. The opposite parties are also directed to pay compensation of Rs.50,000/- to each of the complainants. The opposite parties are directed to pay Rs.5,000/- towards costs of the present proceedings to each of the complainants.<br /> <br /> 7. The original of this order shall be kept in complaint No.1496/2007 and a true copy thereof shall be kept in each of the other cases. <br /> 8. Send the copy of this Order to both the parties free of costs immediately. <br /> <br /> 9. Pronounced in the Open Forum on this 10TH DAY OF JUNE 2008.<br /> Order accordingly,<br /> <br /> <br /> PRESIDENT<br /> <br /> We concur the above findings.<br /> <br /> <br /> MEMBER MEMBER <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />