CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM – X
GOVERNMENT OF N.C.T. OF DELHI
Udyog Sadan, C – 22 & 23, Institutional Area
(Behind Qutub Hotel)
New Delhi – 110 016
Case No.275/2011
SH. NEERAJ BERI
S/O SH. S.D. BERI
R/O J-30, SECTOR-12,
NOIDA, U.P.201301
…………. COMPLAINANT
VS.
- M/S PIYUSH COLONISERS LTD.,
REGD. OFFICE AT A-16/B-1,
MOHAN COOPERATIVE INDUSTRIAL ESTATE,
MAIN MATHURA ROAD,
NEW DELHI-110044
- SH. ASHOK BANSAL
AUTHORISED SIGNATORY
REGD. OFFICE AT A-16/B-1,
MOHAN COOPERATIVE INDUSTRIAL ESTATE,
MAIN MATHURA ROAD,
NEW DELHI-110044
………….. RESPONDENTS
Date of Order:22.04.2016
O R D E R
A.S. Yadav – President
One Mrs. Meenu Jain booked residential plot in “Piyush City” project of OP at Bhiwadi(Rajasthan) and an amount of Rs.4,12,000/- was paid to OP. Booking was transferred in the name of complainant and OP charged Rs.2810/- as transfer charges. After three years of original booking, complainant received a letter dated 26.03.2010 whereby he was informed that he has been allotted a residential plot bearing No.A-69 measuring approximately 228.49 sq. yards in the aforesaid project. It is stated that it was mentioned in the said letter that company shall be forwarding the buyers agreement to complainant for his signature however company did not provide any draft of the same to complainant nor discussed the terms and conditions to facilitate for arriving at any mutual terms and conditions, relevant dates of delivery, or registration of plot etc.
Complainant received a payment schedule alongwith allotment letter dated 26.03.10. Again there was no commitment when the possession will be delivered. On the contrary in another letter dated 26.03.2010, it was stated that the final allotment shall be entirely at the discretion of OP which has the right to reject any application without assigning any reason whatsoever. This further brings to foyer the unilateral approach of OP. In fact OP changed the payment plan to extract the money from the complainant. It was certainly unacceptable situation that after having paid over 40% of the total cost as advanced registration and further payment of another 55% in the installments demanded by OP, the OP chooses to assume no liability to complainant, provide no date of handing over of possession and to complainant, provide no date of handing over of possession and choose to retain a right to deny the complainant any right title or interest in the plot/registration in question.
Complainant tried to contact the office of OOP several time over the phone however without success got no reasonable response. Therefore he wrote an email dated 07.4.10 on OP’s email to the attention of Mr. Anurag. However, OP did not care to respond to complainant’s email. Complainant got a physical copy of the buyers agreement for execution in May 2010. There was no firm possession date in the buyer’s agreement even though the OP was demanding the complaint to pay Rs.406036/- vide two installments within two months of allotment.
It is further stated that to mentally harass the complaint, OP kept sending new demand/reminder letters and OP also started demanding penal interest @ 18% p.a. from complainant for the alleged delayed payments(which was never agreed about by the complainant) without paying any heed to the objections raised by the complainant over the phone, email or during the personal visits to company’s office.
Complainant received a letter dated 16.9.10 falsely stating therein that complaint is no responding and has failed to deposit the installments irrespective of various reminders issued by OP to him. There complainant was informed vide letter dated 28.9.10 that his allotment/booking was cancelled and a refund of amount deposited was offered after deducting 20% of the total amount and interest.
Complainant wrote an email dated 23.9.10. The emails sent to OP were never responded. The action of OP amounts to deficiency in service. It is prayed that OP be directed to restore the allotment to complainant without any delay or to refund the amount deposited by the complainant alongwith 18% interest p.a. and also to pay Rs.1 lakh for compensation lakh and Rs.50,000/- for litigation expenses.
OP in reply took the plea that complainant approached this Forum by stating incomplete and incorrect facts. It is submitted that the allotment was made in favour of complainant on 26.03.2010 where even after several demand letters sent to complainant for the due instalments, complainant did not come forward to make the payment. Consequently OP-1 vide its letter dated 16.09.2010 followed by another letter dated 28.09.2010 cancelled the allotment in favour of the complainant.
It is further stated that this Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain the present complaint as the plot in question is situated in Bhiwadi.
It is submitted that complainant received buyers agreement however he never signed and returned the same to OP-1. It is further submitted that in the Advance Registration Form, no time period has been stipulated for allotment and neither any commitment was made that allotment shall be made in any particular project OP-1. It is submitted that option was always for the complainant to seek refund of the amount paid alongwith interest. It is denied that the payment plan sent by OP-1 alongwith allotment letter was inconsistent with the payment plan sent to other buyers as alleged.
It is submitted that complainant was required to make the payment according to payment plan communicated to complainant alongwith letter dated 26.03.2010. it is submitted that OP-1 was within its right to cancel the allotment in case of default in making the payment and the allotment has been cancelled as complainant failed to make the payment of instalments.
It is denied that OP-1 received any email dated 07.4.10 from complainant and that complainant has ever visited the office of OP-1. It is stated that there was no deficiency in service on the part of OP-1 hence the complaint be dismissed.
We have heard Ld. Counsel for the parties and carefully perused the record.
So far as territorial jurisdiction of this Forum is concerned, it is significant to note that registered and corporate office of OP is within the territorial jurisdiction of this Forum, all payments were received at that very office and all correspondence has been made from that very office. Hence cause of action arose within the territorial jurisdiction of this Forum and this Forum has got territorial jurisdiction to entertain the present complaint.
It is not in dispute that the booking for allotment of the plot was made in June 2006.
It is not in dispute that Rs.4,12,000/- was paid to OP somewhere in 2007. It is not in dispute that the plot No.A-69 measuring approximately 228.49 sq. yards was allotted vide letter dated 26.3.10 and alongwith that letter another letter dated 26.3.10 was sent regarding payment of the instalment. In that letter it is stated that the final allotment shall be entirely at the discretion of OP which has the right to reject any application “without assigning any reason whatsoever”.
A substantial amount of Rs.4,12,000/- was received by OP and amount was kept for more than three years before allotting plot in question. It is not a case of construction of flat in question but allotment of plot was to be made. Again in the allotment letter, no commitment was made for delivery of the possession. It is an admitted fact that subsequently the agreement was sent to complainant but the same was not signed by complainant as the contention of complainant is that there was no commitment regarding the delivery of possession of the plot.
Complainant has placed on record emails sent to OP wherein complainant has specifically stated that the money was kept by OP for three years for without any interest and all of a sudden OP wants entire money without even telling when the possession will be delivered. The buyer’s agreement was given without any firm possession date. The emails sent by complainant were not responded by OP. There is force in the submission of complainant that such a unilateral action on the part of OP amounts to deficiency in service as OP has kept the amount for more than three years without paying any interest and no commitment as to when possession shall be delivered. Under these circumstances, we are of the opinion that it is clear cut case of deficiency in service on the part of OP.
OP should have at least responded to emails of complainant. Immediately after receiving the letter regarding payment of instalment, complainant has sent email dated 07.04.10 whereby he is seeking the buyer’s agreement as well as the commitment as to when the possession will be handed over to him but no response was received from OP.
Complainant is seeking possession of the plot taking into consideration that total value of the plot was around Rs.11,55,000/- which was to be paid upto to year 2010 and only a sum of Rs.4,12,000/- has been paid and the allotment was cancelled in 2010. The interest of justice will suffice if OP is directed to refund the entire amount received from complainant i.e. Rs.4,12,000/- alongwith interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of making the receipt of payment by OP. OP is further directed to pay Rs.10,000/- as compensation and Rs.10,000/- as litigation expenses.
Let the order be complied with within one month of the receipt thereof. The complaint stands disposed of accordingly.
Copy of order be sent to the parties, free of cost, and thereafter file be consigned to record room.
(D.R. TAMTA) (A.S. YADAV)
MEMBER PRESIDENT
