BEFORE THE  DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPTUES REDRESSAL FORUM, FATEHABAD.

Complaint no.136/2019.

Date of instt.08.04.2019. 

                                                                                                Date of Decision:08.11.2019.

Vikas Mutreja son of Mahender Mutreja, resident of Mutreja Textile, Fatehabad.

                                                                                                                                ..Complainant.

                                                                Versus

M/s Paras Realty Development India Limited through its Directors/Authorized Signatories namely Kawal Krishan and Sulender Garhwal near Guru Nank Book Depot, Palika Bazar, Fatehabad.

..Respondents/OPs. 

      Complaint under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986.                                                                   

Before:       Sh.Raghbir Singh, President.

                                     Sh. Jasvinder Singh, Member.

Argued by:                  Sh. Sandeep Nagpal, Advocate for complainant.

  OP already exparte.

ORDER

                The present complaint under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 has been filed by the complainant against the Opposite Parties (hereinafter to be referred as OPs) with the averments that the complainant on persuasion and assurances of the OP regarding handsome return in case of investing money with the OP, had deposited an amount of Rs.5,750/- in instalments with the OP on various dates, first being on 21.12.2011. Thereafter the complainant deposited the half yearly instalments with the Op. Therefore, the complainant availed services of OP and as such the complainant is consumer of the OP as defined in the Consumer Protection Act 1986.

2.                             It is further submitted that against the registration number HR021875841991 issued on 21.12.2011 vide serial number 002325 the estimated return was of Rs.93,438/- to the complainant by the OP and the date of expiry of agreement was 21.06.2017. The registration letter was also issued in the name of the complainant by the OP.

3.                             It is further submitted that the complainant regularly made the payment of the instalments in respect of the above said scheme and after expiry of the agreement on 21.06.2017, the complainant contacted the OP time and again for the return of the amount. However the OP initially avoided the matter under one pretext or the other and thereafter a cheque dated 20.02.2019 for a sum of Rs.90,400/- was issued to the complainant with the assurance that the remaining payment will be paid very soon. However the above said cheque was dishonoured by the Bank of the OP vide memo dated 06.03.2019 with the remarks “Funds Insufficient”. Therefore, a notice under the provisions of Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act 1881 was issued by the complainant to the Ops. It is further submitted that the complainant has not received the above said entire payment alongwith interest till date. Therefore, the above said act on the part of OP amounts to deficiency in rendering service to the complainant. The complainant has further prayed that the OP may be directed for making a payment of Rs. 93,438/- to the complainant along with interest at the rate of 18% per annum with effect from the due date i.e. 21.06.2017 till the date of actual payment. Hence, the present complaint.

4.                             Upon notice, Sh. Kewal Krishan S/o Sh. Naryan Dass appeared on behalf of OP before this Forum on 10.05.2019 and recorded his statement that he is ready for making a payment of Rs.90,400/- to the complainant along with interest and a payment of Rs.10,400/- has been made to the complainant on today.  The remaining amount which is calculated as Rs.29,000/- will be paid by him up to 10.06.2019.

5.                             Thereafter on 10.06.2019, none appeared on behalf of OP. However in the interest of justice, the case was adjourned to 12.07.2019 for presence of the OP and compromise. However thereafter the OP did not appear before this Forum nor filed any reply therefore, the OP was proceeded against exparte vide order dated 09.09.2019.

6.                             The learned counsel for the complainant tendered in evidence affidavit of the complainant as Ex. CW-1/A alongwith the documents as Annexure C-1 to Annexure C-5 and closed the evidence of the complainant.

7.                             We have heard the learned counsel for the complainant and have also perused the documents placed on record. It is the case of the complainant that on the assurance of the OP, the complainant had deposited an amount of Rs.5750/- with the OP in different instalments and the estimated return of the amount was Rs.93,438/- on 21.06.2017 i.e. the expiry date of agreement. It is further the case of the complainant that after expiry of agreement on 21.06.2017, the complainant contacted the OP for the amount agreed to be paid by OP. However despite many visits made by him the above said amount as assured by OP has not been paid to him. It is further the case of the complainant that the above said act on the part of OP amounts to deficiency and as such the complainant is entitled for refund of Rs.90,400/- from the complainant alongwith interest at the rate of 18% from 21.06.2017 till realization.

8.                             In support of his case, the complainant has tendered in evidence his affidavit as Ex. CW-1/A wherein the averments made by him in the complaint have been affirmed. The complainant has also placed on record a copy of registration letter Annexure C-1 and a perusal of the same would show that an amount of Rs.5,750/- was deposited by him with the Ops on 21.12.2011 and the expiryof the agreement was 21.06.2017 and the estimated amount to be paid was Rs.93,438/-. The complainant has also placed on record copy of cheque of Andhra Bank Annexure C-4 and letter of Andhra Bank to BM, Canara Bank Annexure C-3 and a perusal of the same reveals that the cheque could not be encashed for want of insufficient funds.

9.                             It is also pertinent to mention here that Sh. Kewal Krishan, Director of OP company vide his separate statement recorded on 10.05.2019 has submitted that he is ready to make a payment of Rs.90,400/- to the complainant and an amount of Rs.10,400/- has already paid by him today to the complainant. In view of the above statement, the Director of the OP company has admitted the claim of the complainant. However, thereafter none from the OP appeared before this Forum and as such the OP was proceeded exparte.

10.                                          In view of the aforesaid discussion, we are of the considered opinion that the complainant has been able to prove deficiency against the OP in rendering service to him. The present complaint is accordingly allowed and the OP is directed for making a payment of Rs.93,438/-(after deducting the amount which has already been paid) to the complainant along with interest at the rate of 8% from 21.06.2017 till realisation. The OP is further directed for making a payment of Rs.5,000/- to the complainant as litigation charges. The present order be complied with within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of this order, otherwise the amount shall carry an interest at the rate of 8% per annum for the default period. A copy of this order be furnished to both the parties free of cost as provided in the rules.  File be consigned to record room after due compliance.

Announced in open Forum:            

Dt.8.11.2019.                                                      

                                               (Jasvinder Singh)                                     (Raghbir Singh)

                                                    Member                                                  President                                                                                                                                            DCDRF, Fatehabad.