Chandigarh

DF-II

CC/825/2022

JATINJEET SINGH - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/S PANACHE INFRA THROUGH ITS DIRECTOR SH. TARUN VATS - Opp.Party(s)

SIDHARTH GROVER

06 Feb 2024

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION-II,

U.T. CHANDIGARH

Jatinjeet Singh aged 34 years s/o Sh.Kanwaljit Singh presently posted as Squadron Leader, Indian Airforce, Airforce Station Kheria, Ajeet Nagar Gate, Agra, Uttar Pradesh.

….Complainant

Versus

1.  M/s Panache Infra, through its Director Sh. Tarun Vats, SCO No. 34 to 37, Second Floor, Cabin No. 201-A, Sector-9D, Chandigarh. Second Address:- House No. 1006, Phase-10, Mohali, Punjab.

2.  M/s Punjab Empires Pvt. Ltd. through its Director Sh. Tarun Vats, SCO No. 34 to 37, Second Floor, Cabin No. 201-A, Sector-9D, Chandigarh.

3.  Sh. Tarun Vats, Director, M/s Panache Infra and M/s Punjab Empires Pvt. Ltd. R/o Tikka Aima, 212, Palampur, Kangra, Himachal Pradesh. Email Second Address:- House No. 1006, Phase-10, Mohali, Punjab.

4.  Smt. Swatantra Vats, Director, M/s Panache Infra, r/o Tikka Aima, 212, Palampur, Kangra, Himachal Pradesh.

Second Address:- House No. 1006, Phase-10, Mohali, Punjab.

….. Opposite Parties

BEFORE:  MR.AMRINDER SINGH SIDHU,       PRESIDENT

        MR.B.M.SHARMA                 MEMBER

PRESENT:-    Sh.Sidharth Grover, Counsel for the   complainant

               OPs No.1 to 4 exparte.

ORDER BY AMRINDER SINGH SIDHU, M.A (Eng.), LLM, PRESIDENT

         The complainant has filed the present complaint pleading that the complainant booked one residential independent floor No.93/3^rd measuring 200 sq. yards in “Panache Floors” in Gulmohar Residency in Sector 116, Mohali (GMADA), Distt. S.A.S. Nagar, Punjab for a total sale consideration of Rs.41.00 lakhs by paying the booking amount of Rs.8.25 lakhs which he paid to the OPs on different dates as detailed in para 4 of the complaint (Ann.C-1). The OPs formally issued allotment letter dated 20.04.2015 (Ann.C-2) and an Independent Floor Buyer Agreement was executed between the parties on 20.04.2015 and the OPs retained the original copy and rather the OPs supplied the duplicate agreement without signatures to the complainant. However, no construction/ development works were carried out by the OPs in the said project. It has further been alleged that the complainant requested OP No.3 either to give the possession of the unit or to refund its price in response to which OP No.3 issued one postdate cheque dated 07.02.2018 for Rs.25,000/- and 7 post dated cheques all dated 07.02.2018 for Rs.1,00,000/- each and the remaining amount of Rs.1,00,000/- was promised to be paid in cash along with interest with an assurance that if the OPs failed to deliver the possession by 07.02.2018 then the complainant can encash the aforesaid cheques. When the OPs failed to deliver the possession, the complainant presented the cheques issued by the OPs but the same were dis-honoured due to insufficient funds  (Ann.C-5 & C-6). It is stated that the complainant came to know that the said project had been shelved by the OPs without any intimation to him.  It is also stated that the complainant requested the OPs many times to refund his but to no effect. Hence this complaint has been filed alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of OPs with prayer to direct the OPs to refund the deposited amounts along with interest, compensation as well as litigation expenses.

2]      Despite due service through proclamation, OPs No.1 & 2 failed to put in appearance, resultantly, they were ordered to be proceeded against exparte vide order dated 21.06.2023.      

         The OPs No.3 & 4 did not turn up despite service of notices, hence they were proceeded exparte vide order dated 24.03.2023.

3]      The complainant led evidence in support of his case.

4]       We have heard the ld.Counsel for the complainant and have gone through the documents on record including written submissions.

5]       In the present complaint, the complainant has placed on record photo-copies of allotment letter dated 20.1.2015 as well as Independent Floor Buyer Agreement dated 20.04.2015 as Ann.C-2 & C-3 but both these documents have neither been signed by the Opposite Parties nor there is any other proof to the effect that it was so agreed between the parties.  The complainant in his complaint has stated that the OPs have retained the original documents and provided him photocopies only and that too without signing the same. In these circumstances, it is legally desirable that the complainant moved an application under the relevant provisions/rules of The Consumer Protection Act, 2019/Rules 2020 to summon the record from the OPs or from the concerned authorities to prove the same and in its absence, it cannot be presumed that the bare photocopies without signature of any parties are admissible in evidence and can be relied upon. Hence, the complainant has failed to prove that such agreement between the parties was executed. It is a settled principle of law that the complainant has to stand at his own legs and prove his case by way of evidence or otherwise but in the present complaint, he failed to prove the same.  Therefore, this complaint is liable to be dismissed.  Accordingly, the complaint is dismissed with no order as to costs.

6]       The pending application(s) if any, stands disposed of accordingly.

         The Office is directed to send certified copy of this order to the parties, free of cost, as per rules & law under The Consumer Protection Rules & Act accordingly. After compliance file be consigned to record room.     

Announced

06.02.2024                                                                               Sd/-

 (AMRINDER SINGH SIDHU)

PRESIDENT

Sd/-

(B.M.SHARMA)

MEMBER