| ORDER | DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, PATIALA. Complaint No. CC/15/215 of 29.9.2015 Decided on: 25.2.2016 1. Surinderpal Singh Sabharwal, aged about 63 years son of Sh.Sohan Singh. 2. Inder Mohan Kaur Sabharwal, aged about 61 years, wife of Surinderpal Singh Sabharwal, both residents of H.No.5-B, Sunny Enclave, Kharar, Sector 125,SAS Nagar (Mohali),Pb. …………...Complainant Versus 1. M/s Parsavnath King City under M/s Parsvnath Developers Ltd., Village Dahrian & Shambhu Kalan, Tehsil Rajpura, District Patiala, through its Managing Director. 2. M/s Parsvnath Developers Ltd., through its Competent Regional Officer, having its Regd. office at Parsvnath Royale, Behind Society No.105, Sector 20, Panchkula (Haryana) 3. M/s Parsvnath Developers Ltd., through its Managing Director/Chief Executive Officer, having its Head Office at 6th Floor, Aurnachal Building ,19,Barakhmaba Road, New Delhi-110001. …………….Ops Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act. QUORUM Sh. A.P.S.Rajput, President Smt.Neelam Gupta, Member Smt.Sonia Bansal,Member Present: For the complainant: Sh.Manpreet Singh, Advocate For Ops No.1&3: Sh.Dhiraj Puri,Advocate ORDER A.P.S.Rajput, PRESIDENT - Complainants Surinderpal Singh Sabharwal and Inder Mohan Kaur Sabharwal, aged 63 years and 61 years respectively, residents of H.No.5-B, Sunny Enclave, Kharar, Sector 125, SAS Nagar (Mohali) Pb. have filed this complaint against the Opposite Parties (hereinafter referred to as the OPs) under Sections 11 to 14 of the Consumer Protection Act. The brief facts of the complaint are as under:
- It is stated by the complainants that on being allured by the proposal given by the Ops for the allotment of a plot in the “King City” situated at Rajpura, the complainants purchased plot No.0362 measuring 235 sq.yds.(196.48 sq.meters) through a Plot Buyer Agreement, which was executed on 18.6.2007 between the complainants and the Ops, for a total sale price of Rs.11,29,175/-. The complainant paid Rs.7lacs to the ops vide cheque No.189223 dated 7.6.2007 drawn on State Bank of India, Branch New Delhi. The complainant also paid Rs.2,37,000/- to the Ops. Thus the total amount of Rs.937,000/- was paid by the complainant to the ops till 2007. It is stated by the complainant that as per clause 7-A of the Agreement, the promoters shall endeavour to give possession of the plot to the buyer by 31st July 2008/14 January,2009 or on before the extended period.
- It is also stated by the complainants that the internal development work of the colony such as laying of roads, water supply lines, over head and under ground water tanks , sewer, disposal lines electrification will be as per the specifications given in the agreement. It is stated that no intimation regarding the period of extension beyond the period of 31 July 2008, 14 January 2009 for the delivery of plot was given to the complainants. No development work of any kind at the site was done by the Ops. The complainants approached the Ops for the delivery of the possession of the plot but the Ops did not honour the same.A legal notice dated 16.4.2015 was also got sent by the complainants upon the Ops for seeking the refund of the amount of Rs.9,37,000/-with interest but to no effect. Thus on account of deficiency in service on the part of the Ops, the complainant prayed for a direction to the Ops to return the amount of Rs.9,37,000/- alongwith interest @ 18% per annum from the date of the payment and Rs.5,00,000/- on account of mental tension, undue and unnecessary harassment suffered by the complainants.
- The cognizance of the complaint was taken against Ops no.1&3 only who appeared through their counsel Sh.Dhiraj Puri,Advocate but the Ops failed to file the written version despite having availed of four opportunities.
- The complainants in support of their complaint tendered in evidence Ex.CA the sworn affidavit of the complainant Sh.Surinderpal Singh Sabharwal alongwith documents Exs.C1 to C14 and their counsel closed the evidence.
- The parties failed to file the written arguments. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the evidence on record.
- The ld. counsel for the complainant has submitted that the main controversy involved in the present case in hand is that the OPs have violated the settled agreement between the parties by not handing over the possession on time. He also submitted that no intimation was ever given by the OPs to the complainant regarding extension of time for possession, despite the fact that the complainant had been regularly depositing the installments. The ld. counsel also stated that the Ops had been lingering on to handover the possession on one pretext or the other. It is further pleaded that offer of possession was given after a period of 6 years and due to the said delay the complainant was compelled to construct another house. The ld. counsel argued that even after the delay of offer of possession, the OPs were unable to complete the development work, as per the agreement i.e Ex.C3.The ld. counsel further argued that from the act and conduct it is proved that the OPs have committed deficiency of service by not giving the possession on time, by not completing the development work after offer of possession and also by not giving any intimation to the complainant for extension of time, hence complainant deserves to be compensated for the same.
- After hearing the Ld. Counsel for the complainant and going through the pleadings and evidence produced , as well as written submissions, we find force in the submissions made by the ld. counsel for the complainant. It is evident from the plot buyer agreement i.e. Ex.C3 clause 7(a) that the OPs had agreed to deliver the possession of the plot to the complainant by 31/07/2008.It is also evident from the offer of possession letter i.e Ex.C7 that the OPs had delayed to handover the possession of the said plot for 6 years. It is also established from the receipts of payments i.e. Ex.C4 and Ex.C5 that the OPs had received a sum of Rs.9,37,215/- from complainant for the said plot. It is further evident from Ex.C13 i.e surrender letter and Ex.C14 i.e reply to the surrender letter, that the OPs had refused to refund the consideration paid by the complainant and asked the complainant to sell the said plot in open market.
- In our opinion the OPs had not been able to give possession of the said plot as per the terms and conditions of the agreement. The Ops after a period of 6 years gave the offer of possession and during this period the OPs were unable to intimate/inform the complainant, as to when can they offer the possession. Due to the circumstances, the complainant was compelled to construct another house. Moreover the Ops had offered to give possession, without any development work as agreed in the agreement. In our view the complainant has fully proved his case.
- Accordingly in view of the aforesaid discussion, we find that the OPs had delayed the offer of possession for about 6 years and even after offer of possession, they were unable to complete the development work/ facilities, as per the terms and condition of the agreement. Thus we find that the OP no.1 &3 have committed deficiency of service and thereby caused unnecessary mental as well as physical harassment to the complainant. Hence we direct OP no.1 & OP no.3 to refund Rs.9,37,000/-alongwith interest @ Rs.6% per annum from the date of filing of this complaint. The Ops are further directed to pay a compensation for deficiency of service amounting to Rs.10,000/- alongwith litigation costs of Rs.5000/-.The Ops are also directed to comply with this order within 45 days from the date of the receipt of this order.In case they failed to comply with the order within the prescribed period they will be liable to pay 6% interest on the total awarded amount.
- The arguments on the complaint were heard on 16.2.2016 and the order was reserved. Now the order be communicated to the parties. Copy of the order be sent to the parties free of cost and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room.
Pronounced Dated: 25.2.2016 Sonia Bansal Neelam Gupta A.P.S.Rajput Member Member President | |
