View 1147 Cases Against Parsvnath
View 981 Cases Against Parsvnath Developers
GAZAL GARG filed a consumer case on 25 May 2018 against M/S PARSVNATH DEVELOPERS & ORS. in the StateCommission Consumer Court. The case no is CC/13/554 and the judgment uploaded on 11 Jun 2018.
IN THE STATE COMMISSION : DELHI
(Constituted under Section 9 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986)
Date of Decision:25.05.2018
Complaint Case No.554/2013
Gazal Garg,
Daughter of Shri Rajiv Garg,
Resident of 365, Jagriti Enclave,
Delhi-110092.
…Complainant
Versus
Registered Office at: Parsvnath Metro Tower,
Near Shahdara Metro Station, Shahdara,
Delhi-110032.
Through its Director/A.R./Manager.
Corporate Office at: 6th Floor, Arunchal Building 19,
Barakhamba Road, New Delhi-110001.
Through its Director/A.R./Manager.
….Opposite Party
CORAM
Justice Veena Birbal, President
Ms. Salma Noor, Member
1. Whether reporters of local newspaper be allowed to see the judgment?
2. To be referred to the reporter or not?
Justice Veena Birbal, President
“a) issue appropriate direction to the Opposite Party for delivery/allotment/possession of the plot measuring 500 sq.yds., under Customer Code PH/G0015 at Sonepat Scheme under P&F Projects of the Opposite Party in favour the complainant;
b) award interest @ 24% p.a. on the amount deposited by the complainant with the Opposite Party w.e.f. 2005 upto delivery of possession of the said plot;
c) award compensation amount of Rs.10,00,000/- in favour of the complainant against the Opposite Party on account of mental agony, harassment, pain etc.;
d) award cost of Rs.2,50,000/- as litigation charges in favour of the complainant against the Opposite Party;
e) Any other or further order(s)/relief(s) as this Hon’ble Court deems fit and appropriate in the facts and circumstances of this case may also kindly be passed in favour of the complainant and against the Opposite Party.”
5. Both the parties filed evidence in the form of affidavits.
6. Complainant has filed her own affidavit in the evidence wherein contents of the complaint case are reiterated on oath. The complainant has proved on record the payment receipts and advance registration form, Ex-CW-1/1 (Colly). A letter dated 25.5.11 of OP, Ex-CW-1/2 informing the complainant that allotment of plot in her favour may take some more time and that the terms of registration will continue to be applicable till the allotment of plot.
7. On behalf of OP, affidavit of Shri Ramesh Chander Gupta, General Manager (CRM) has been filed who has reproduced the contents of written statement on oath. OP has filed copy of letter dated 4.1.06, Ex-OP-1.
8. We have heard Counsel for the parties and perused the material on record.
9. As regards preliminary objection that the complainant is an investor, nothing on record is placed by OP to substantiate the same. It is not the case of the OP that complainant is engaged in the business of purchasing and selling houses/plots on regular basis and is making profits. OP has levelled bald allegation. The objection raised in this regard is rejected. Reliance is placed on the judgement of Kavita Ahuja vs Shipra Estate Ltd. & Jai Krishna Estate Developers Pvt. Ltd. & Ors., 1 (2016) CPJ 31 (NC).
10. OP has also failed to show as to how the complicated questions of facts and law are involved in case. The objection raised in this regard is also rejected.
11. It is admitted position that vide registration form, Ex-CW-1/1, the complainant had booked a plot in the project of OP and paid Rs.6,56,250/- towards booking amount. Thereafter, further payment of Rs.6,56,250/- is given. The registration form, payment receipts, Ex-CW-1/1 (Colly) are placed on record by the complainant. It is also not disputed that no allotment of plot has been made so far in favour of the complainant. OP has relied upon letter dated 4.1.06 to contend that further payment of Rs.13,12,500/- was not paid as such the plot was not allotted. We have perused the said letter. The said letter is only for enlisting the name in the priority list. The aforesaid letter has been written to cover up the delay and to create false defence in its favour. In fact vide letter dated 25.5.11, Ex-CW-1/2, OP has written to the complainant as under:
“This refers to your discussion had with us. We appreciate your continued confidence reposed in us. The allotment of the Plot in your favour may take some more time. The terms of registration will continue to be applicable till the allotment of the plot.”
12. Despite writing aforesaid letter to complainant, till date no plot has been allotted to complainant. In fact during arguments, Ld. Counsel for OP has fairly conceded that P&F project of OP has not come up as such plot cannot be allotted to complainant. It is stated that OP is ready to refund the amount as per clause (f) of Booking Form dated 13.2.05 i.e. Ex-CW-1/1. The relevant clause is as under:
“Though the company shall try to make an allotment but in case it fails to do so for any reason whatsoever, no claim of any nature, monetary or otherwise would be raised by me/us except that the advance money paid by me/us shall be refunded to me/us with 10% simple interest per annum.”
13. On reading above, it is clear that if for any reason, OP is not in a position to allot the plot in that event, the money shall be refunded by the OP with 10% simple interest per annum.
14. In view of the above said terms and conditions of the booking, OP is liable to refund the amount deposited by complainant with interest @ 10% per annum on the said amount. It may be mentioned that complainant had booked the plot in the project of OP at Sonepat in the year 2005. When OP had come to know that the project is not going to come up, it ought to have returned the money of its own instead of dragging the consumer into litigation and causing harassment to him. Further the matter remained pending for 5 years before us. Even during pendency, no such offer is made.
15. In view of above discussion, the complaint is allowed with the following directions:
1. OP shall refund the entire amount of Rs.13,12,500/- to the complainant within 8 weeks from today along with paying simple interest @ 10% per annum from the date of each payment till realization of the amount.
2. OP shall also pay Rs.1 lac for causing mental agony and harassment to complainant including cost of litigation to the complainant.
16. A copy of this order as per the statutory requirement be forwarded to the parties free of charge. Thereafter, the file be consigned to Record Room.
(Salma Noor)
Member
sa
Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes
Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.