Before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Rohtak.
Complaint No. : 614.
Instituted on : 28.12.2020.
Decided on : 28.07.2023
Suresh Kumar s/o Sh. Hawa Singh, R/o H.No.80 Sector-4, Rohtak since deceased through legal heirs.
- Veena Deshwal widow of Sh. Suresh Kumar
- Himani Deshwal daughter of Late Sh. Suresh Kumar
- Shaurya Deshwal son of late Sh. Suresh Kumar.
- Harshita d/o Suresh Kumar,
All r/o H.No.80 Sec. 4, Rohtak.
………..Complainant.
Vs.
- M/S Parsvnath Developers Limited, registered office at Parsvnath Tower, near Shahdara Metro station. Shahdara, Delhi-110032 through its Director/ General Manager.
- The Manager, M/S Parsvnath Developers Limited, office situated near Block C, near Bohar Bypass, Parsvnath City, Rohtak
……….Opposite parties.
COMPLAINT U/S 35 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT.
BEFORE: SH.NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT.
DR. TRIPTI PANNU, MEMBER.
Present: Sh.S.P.Dhankhar, Advocate for the complainant.
Sh. Rajesh Sharma, Advocate for opposite parties.
ORDER
NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT:
1. Brief facts of the case as per complainant are that the opposite party company has planned to develop a residential colony with the name "Parsvnath City" in Village Bohar, District Rohtak and has laid out plots of various sizes in the said colony as per the layout plan approved by DTCP. Prior to developing the project, the opposite party no. 1 has obtained license no. 36 of 2010 dated 07.05.2010 from DTCP as disclosed by the opposite parties to the interested buyers. The complainant has applied for purchase of a residential plot in the said colony and complainant agreed to purchase residential plot no. C-099 in block no. C measuring 203.17 sq m. (243 sq. yard) approx. The basic price of the plot is Rs.12,52,613.75 calculated @ Rs.5171.25 per sq. yard. (Rs.6185.03 per sq. meter) of the plot area to be reduced or increased at the final measurement on the completion of development work. The complainant has paid a sum of Rs.1041007/- so far to the opposite parties in shape of booking amount, installments and other charges. A plot buyer agreement to this effect was duly executed between the parties on 08.03.2013. That after depositing the above said amount, when the complainant enquired about the next installment amount then the opposite party's officials told the complainant that there was a dispute over the land where plot no.C-099 exists, so after resolution of the dispute the complainant will be informed about the amount of the next installment. But despite waiting for sufficient time, the opposite party's officials did not disclose about the status of the dispute and the amount to be paid by the complainant and ultimately with sincere efforts, the complainant came to know that the land where plot no. C-099 exist in Block C is acquired by HSIIDC and the opposite party company does not remain the owner of the same and when the complainant went to the opposite party office then first, the opposite parties offered him to allot a plot of similar value and location as plot no.C-099 existed and assured to allot the plot on land owned and developed by the opposite party no. 1 near the land where plot no. C-099 was located. But later on, despite various visits on the part of the complainant and even elapse of more than 8 years, the opposite parties have not allotted any plot in Parsvnath City, Rohtak so far. Now the opposite party No.1 has resolved the dispute and has started to allot the plots to the buyer of plot in block C on other land in block E who agreed to purchase plots by way of a written agreement and the complainant is also entitled to get allotted a plot of similar value and location on same terms and conditions vide agreement dated 08.03.2013. But despite various visits opposite parties did not do the needful. Hence there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties. Complainant sent a legal notice dated 10.08.2020 to the opposite party but any heed was not paid to his requests. Hence this complaint and it is prayed that opposite parties may kindly be directed to allot a plot to the complainant equal to the value and location of plot no.C-099 as agreed to allot vide plot buyer agreement dated 08.03.2013 on same terms and conditions after receiving the balance amount of the value of the plot to be allotted after adjustment of the amount of Rs.1041007/- paid by the complainant beside the amount of Rs.15 lacs as compensation on account of causing mental agony and harassment, financial loss etc. along with interest @ 18% p.a.. from the date of filing the present complaint till its actual realization and Also to pay Rs.50,000/- as litigation expenses to the complainant.
2. After registration of complaint, notices were issued to the opposite parties. Opposite parties in their reply had submitted that opposite party company alongwith its Associate Companies acquired the land admeasuring 118.188 acres in Village Bohar, District Rohtak, Haryana and obtained the licence bearing no 36 of 2010 dated 07.05 2010 from the Director Town and Country Planning, Haryana, Chandigarh for the promotion and development of a residential colony on the Project land. The said licence was valid upto 06 May, 2014. Subsequently, DTCP de-licensed an area admeasuring 14.15 acres on 7 November, 2014 on account of the said land being acquired by HSIIDC. The respondent company applied for renewal of the said licence for the area admeasuring 104.038 acres on 7th October 2015. Thereafter, the opposite party company applied for the renewal of the licences for further period. The Complainant had booked a Plot bearing No. C-099 area ad-measuring 243 sq. yard in the Project "Parsvnath City” Sector- 33, 33-A, near IMT Industrial Area, Delhi Bypass Road, Rohtak- 124001, Haryana at the basic cost of Rs. 12,56,613/- (Rupees Twelve Lakhs Fifty Six Thousand Six Hundred and Thirteen Only). Complainant was duly allotted the Plot. However, later on the land was acquired by HSIIDC and thereafter no plot could be offered to the complainant as the complainant failed to clear the outstanding dues even after several reminders and letters being sent to the complainant. It is denied that there is any deficiency or unfair trade practice on part of the Opposite Party. All the other contents of the complaint were stated to be wrong and denied.
Opposite party prayed for dismissal of complaint with costs.
3. Ld. counsel for the complainant in his evidence tendered affidavit Ex.C1, documents Ex.C2 to Ex.C16 and closed his evidence on dated 07.11.2022. Ld. counsel for the opposite parties has tendered affidavit Ex.RW1/A, documents Ex.R1 to Ex.R3 and closed his evidence on 31.05.2023.
4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the material aspects of the case very carefully.
5. Initially the complaint was filed by Suresh Kumar but during the pendency of the case, complainant Suresh Kumar died and Veena Deshwal, Himani Deshwal, Shaurya Deshwal and Harshita are the L.Rs of complainant. As per complainant he has deposited an amount of Rs.1041107/- with the opposite parties on account of purchase of residential plot no.C-099 in Block C measuring 203.17 sq.m.(243 sq. yard) approx. But till date possession of the plot has not been given to the complainant. Complainant came to know that the land where plot no.C-099 exist in Block C has been acquired by HSIIDC. So he requested the opposite parties to allot an alternative plot. The main contention of the opposite parties is that the complainant has not deposited the outstanding payment with interest with the respondent company. Ex.R3 is the reminder-1 issued by the respondent to the complainant on 13.08.2012, 2nd reminder was issued on 12.09.2013 Ex.R3 and 3rd and final remainder was issued on 11.12.2013. As per alleged reminders opposite parties demanded an amount of Rs.770102/- as outstanding amount against the said unit. An unfair trade practice on behalf of the respondent has been seen in the present case. In fact Ex.C2 is the agreement and this agreement was executed between the parties on dated 18.03.2013 and Plan-B has been adopted by the complainant. The unit has been allotted initially to Mr. Suresh Kumar on 23.08.2010 and thereafter transferred in the name of complainant on 28.12.2010. As per account statement Ex.C10 the complainant has deposited total amount of Rs.1041107/- with the respondents upto dated 28.12.2012 including the basic cost external development charges and IDC. Thereafter in the year of 2020 the complainant came to know that some land has been acquired by the Govt. and respondent are allotting alternate plot to some allottees. He moved an application with the respondent on 13.07.2020 which was duly received by the respondent company. After that a legal notice was also issued on dated 10.08.2020 but till the filing of the complaint, the respondent officials have not allotted any alternate plot to the complainant. Hence there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties and as per our opinion complainant is entitled for alternate plot after depositing the remaining amount of instalment as demanded by the respondents through their letters Ex.R3 amounting to Rs.770103/-. Reliance has also been placed upon the authorities cited by ld. counsel for the complainant, of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India titled as Today Home and Infrastructure Pvt.Ltd. Vs.Ajay Nagpal & ors decided on 02.12.2020, Experion Developers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Sushma Ashok Shiroor decided on 07.04.2022 and the same are fully applicable on the facts and circumstances of the case.
6. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, we hereby allow the complaint and direct the opposite parties to give the possession of an alternate plot of similar value, similar size and location in ‘Parsvnath City, Rothak developed by the opposite party company on same terms and conditions as agreed in plot-buyer agreement dated 08.03.2013 to the complainants after depositing the remaining outstanding amount of Rs.707102/- without any interest by the complainant. Opposite parties are further directed to make a demand from the complainants regarding the outstanding amount i.e. Rs.707102/- within 15 days from the date of order and thereafter, complainants are directed to deposit the alleged amount within 15 days after making the demand of alleged amount by the opposite parties. Opposite parties are further directed to pay a sum of Rs.50000/-(Rupees fifty thousand only) as compensation on account of deficiency in service and Rs.5000/-(Rupees five thousand only) as litigation expenses to the complainant. Order shall be complied within 60 days from the date of decision, failing which opposite parties shall be liable to pay interest @ 9% p.a. on the amount deposited by the complainant i.e. Rs.1041107/- from the date of filing the present complaint i.e. 28.12.2020 till its realization to the complainants.
7. Copy of this order be supplied to both the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.
Announced in open court:
28.07.2023.
................................................
Nagender Singh Kadian, President
..........................................
Tripti Pannu, Member.
.
