Haryana

Yamunanagar

CC/336/2013

Dr.Mukesh Kumar Sehgal S/o Amrit Lal Sehgal - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s S.N.Realtors Pvt.Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Ramesh Chand Sharma

11 Aug 2017

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, YAMUNA NAGAR. 

 

Complaint Case No.336 of 2013
Date of Institution: 08.05.2013
Date of Decision:   11.08.2017 

 

Dr. Mukesh Kumar Sehgal aged about 42 years, son of Shri Amrit Lal Sehgal, 241 Sector 17 HUDA, Jagadhri, District Yamuna Nagar.

                                                                                        

                                                                                                               ….COMPLAINANT

Versus

1. M/s SN Realtors pvt. Ltd. (A wholly owned subsidiary of M/s Omaxe Ltd.) Registered Office : Omaxe house, #7 Local Shopping Complex, Kalkaji, New Delhi 110019 (India).
2. M/s SN Realtors  Pvt. Ltd. (A wholly owned subsidiary of M/s Omaxe Ltd.) Registered Office : SCO 174, HUDA Jagadhri, District Yamuna Nagar (Haryana)-135003.

                                                                                           ….OPPOSITE PARTIES

 

 

BEFORE:    SH. DHARAM PAL …………..……….. PRESIDENT.

                    SH. S.C.SHARMA………………………….MEMBER.

                    SMT. VEENA RANI SHEOKAND…..…… MEMBER

 

Present:       Shri RC Sharma, Advocate for complainant.

        Shri  Harinder Kumar, Advocate for OPs

 

ORDER      (DHARAM PAL, PRESIDENT)

 

1.                  The complainant Dr. Mukesh Kumar Sehgal has filed the present complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 against respondents (herein after Respondents will be referred as OPs).

2.                Brief facts of the present complaint, as alleged by the complainant, are that complainant has applied for allotment of a residential plot measuring size 495.62 sq yards at Jagadhri and for the same deposited an amount of Rs.5,47,500/-  through Cheque No.793817 dated 10.01.2013. The complainant again deposited an amount of Rs.1,50,000/- on 20.02.2013. In nutshell the complainant had deposited an amount of Rs.6,97,500/- till date. Against the said amount the receipts has already been issued to the complainant by office of the OP 2 (Annexure C-1 to C-3). The complainant has already submitted all the documents as desired by the Ops along with the application. The complainant has made several requests to the OPs No.1 and 2 to issue him formal allotment letter/legal document in repsect of the abvove said plot but the same has not been isused to him till date. Finding no other alternate, complainant got served with a registered AD Legal notice dated 06.04.2013 (Annexure C-4), but all in vain. Hence, this complaint wherein it has been prayed that Ops may please be ordered to handover the possession of the plot along ith proper allotment letter or to refund the total amount of Rs.6,97,500/- along with interest and also to pay compensation as well as litigation expenses.

3.                Upon notice, OPs appeared and filed their written statement taking some preliminary objections such as Hon’ble Forum has no territorial jurisdiction to entertain the present complaint; there is no consumer dispute between the parties and the complainant is not a consumer, complainant has not come to this Forum with the true facts of this case and has concealed the various material facts, the complaint is without any cause of action, complainant applied for the allotment of a plot with the OPs on the terms and conditions set out in the said application. As per the said application, it is admitted case of the complainant that before applying for allotment of residential plot he had verified the terms /conditions of provisional allotment and price of the said residential plot, with the other development in the vicinity and had fully satisfied about the terms/ conditions price of the said residential plot and nature of right, title, interest of the company in the said project to be developed and constructed by the OP as per prevailing by law/ guidelines of the Directorate, Town and Country Planning, Haryana HUDA or any other concerned department. It is also admitted case of the complainant that he had understood and agreeing with the payment plan opted by him and further agreeing that timely payment of the installment of the basic cost and allied/additional cost, government levy etc. pertaining to the said plot is essence of the terms of booking The complainant further agree to make all payment within time as per the terms of the schedule of the payment as mentioned in Annexure A and/ or as may demanded by the company from time to time and that the company is under no obligations to send demand/reminders for the payment. If he made default in making payment of the due amounts with the stipulated period the company may inter alia

1. To keep on abeyance/suspension of the booking or cancel the allotment of the said Residential plot;
2. To forfeit/deduct the earnest money together with interest on installments due but unpaid and interest on delayed payments.
3. To re-allocate the provisional allotment of the said Residential plot which includes change in area and location of the said Residential plot.

It is further submitted that inter alia the amongst the other, from the above terms and conditions the complainant applied for allotment of a plot on 11.01.2013. As per the booking date by the complainant, the complainant was to make payment of a sum of Rs.35,44,665/- (BSP), Rs.2,53,262/- (PLC), Rs.20,000/- (IFMS), Rs.25,000/- (Club membership fees). The complainant obtained a time linked payment plan payment of the above said amount the same is as follow:

At the time of Booking	15% of BSP
On allotment	10% of BSP
On 60th day of allotment	10% of BSP
On 120th day of allotment	10% of BSP + 50% of PLC (if any)
On 180th day of allotment	10% of BSP
On 240th day of allotment	10% of BSP + 50% of PLC (if any)
On 300th day of allotment	10% of BSP
On 360th day of allotment	10% of BSP
On 410th day of allotment	10% of BSP
On offer of possession	5% of BSP+ additional cost+ IFMS+ EDC & IDC+ other cost (if any)

 

After making initial booking amount, the complainant started making default in making of payment. As per the payment schedule, on 30 days  of allotment the complainant was liable to make payment of Rs.3,38,916.25 i.e. by 10.02.2013, therefore he was intimated for the above said due amount by the OPs vide registered letter dated 24.01.2013 but the complainant failed to meet out the said demand and with great delay, he made only part payment of Rs.1,50,000/- on 20.02.2013 and thereafter he made no payments as per the above payment plan despite reminders. The OP had also sent allotment letter to the complainant on 09.04.2013 by courier i.e. BLAZEFLASH COURIER LIMITED (POD No.299597201). However, the complainant had not returned the said allotment letter and paid the due amount of the above said Plot No.OCY/Block-A/11 in Omaze City, Yamuna Nagar. As per record of the OPs, the complainant as on date is liable to pay a sum of Rs.13,79,247/- and interest of Rs.70,504/- for the above plot, which the complainant is not paying for one reason or other. From the conduct of the complainant, it is clear that the complainant is an investor, who invested in real estate for commercial purpose to earn profit of resale but considering less profit or no profit of the investment due to recession had not made any further payment and falsely alleging that the OP  is at fault or its services are deficient or is entitled for the relief as prayed from this Hon’ble Forum. The complainant admittedly had paid a sum of Rs.697500/- till date but still the complainant is seeking relief of possession to proper allotment letter of the above said plot on payment of initial booking amount. What is irony? Rest contents of the complaint were controverted and reiterated the stand taken in the preliminary objections. Lastly prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

4.                In support his case, learned counsel for the complainant tendered into evidence affidavit of complainant as Annexure CX and documents as Annexure C1 to C4 and the closed the evidence on behalf of complainant.

5.                 On the other hand, learned counsel for the OPs tendered into evidence affidavit of Shri Parveen Kumar Gupta as Annexure RA and documents as Annexure R1 to R6 and closed the evidence on behalf of OPs. 

6.                We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have also perused the record.

7.                Admittedly, the complainant had booked a residential plot with the OPs and as per application Form (Annexure R-2) the details of the plot is as under:-

Details of pricing:

	BSP as per applicable price list (Sq. mtr. /Sq. yard	Price
A.Basic cost of the Residential Plot
Basic sale price (BSP)	Rs. 7154	Rs. 3545665/-
Preferential Location Charges		Rs.253261/-
B. Additional Cost
Club	0	Rs.25000/-
Other Cost	0	0
C. Maintenance Security
Interest free maintenance security (IFMS)	0	Rs.20000/-
D.  Government Levies
External Development charges (EDC) Infrastructural Development Charges (IDC) (as applicable)	0	0
Total Amount (A+B+C+D) Amount in Figure	0	Rs.38,43,926/-
Amount in words

                   A total sum of Rs.6,97,500/- was paid by the complainant to the Ops. The total consideration of plot purchased by the complainant is Rs. 38,43,926/- which is agreed to be paid by the complainant.

8.                Before examining the case on merit, we will refer to Section 11 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 relating to pecuniary jurisdiction of the District Consumer Forum

11. Jurisdiction of the District Forum 1 Subject to the other  provisions of this Act, the District Forum shall have jurisdiction to entertain complaints where the value of the goods or services and  the compensation, if any, claimed does not exceed rupees twenty  lakh.

9.                From the perusal of the Annexure R2, the value of the flat in question was Rs.38,43,926/-. and the complainant sought directions from this Forum for refund of amount of Rs. 6,97,500/- alongwith interest @ 24% per annum and compensation Rs. 5,00,000/- on account of mental agony and physical harassment and a sum of Rs. 5500/- as litigation expenses. 

10.               The Hon’ble National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi, in the case of Ambrish Kumar Shukla & 21 Ors. Ferrous Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., Consumer Case No. 97 of 2016, decided on 07.10.2016 has held as under: -

“Reference dated 11.8.2016

Issue No. i

     It is the value of the goods or services, as the case may be, and not the value or cost of removing the deficiency in the service which is to be considered for the purpose of determining the pecuniary jurisdiction.

Xxxxxxxx

Issue No. iii

     The consideration paid or agreed to be paid by the consumer at the time of purchasing the goods or hiring or availing of the services, as the case may be, is to be considered, along with the compensation, if any, claimed in the complaint, to determine the pecuniary jurisdiction of a Consumer Forum.”

11.               In view of the above, the value of the plot/services in the instant case is Rs.38,43,926/-.  The complainant has sought compensation of Rs. 5,00,000/- + Rs. 5500/-. In view of the above, it is clear that total value of consideration and compensation claimed by the complainant exceed the pecuniary jurisdiction of Rs.20,00,000/- of this forum. Therefore, it is clear that this forum has no pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain and try this complaint.

12.               In view of the above, it is held that the complaint is dismissed with no order as to costs, being not maintainable before this Forum for want of pecuniary jurisdiction. However, the complainant is at liberty to file the complaint before the appropriate authority having pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain and decide the same. A copy of this order be sent to the parties free of costs and file be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

 Announced in open court.11.08.2017

 

 

                                                     (DHARAMPAL)

                                                     PRESIDENT

                                                     D.C.D.R.F.YAMUNA NAGAR

                                                     AT JAGADHRI

 

 

 

(VEENA RANI SHEOKAND)            (S.C.SHARMA)

MEMBER                                             MEMBER

 

 

Note: Each and every page of this order has been duly signed by me.

 

 

                                                     (DHARAMPAL)

                                                     PRESIDENT

                                                     D.C.D.R.F.YAMUNA NAGAR

                                                      AT JAGADHRI