IN THE DISTRICT CONSUMERS’ DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM AT MYSORE<br /> <br /> PRESENT: 1. Shri.A.T.Munnoli<br /> B.A., L.L.B (Spl.) - President <br /> <br /> 2. Smt.Y.V.Uma Shenoi<br /> M.Sc., B.Ed., - Member<br /> 3. Shri. Shivakumar.J.<br /> B.A., L.L.B., - Member<br /> <br /> CC 180-2010 DATED 08.07.2010<br /> ORDER<br /> <br /> Complainant K.Mohan, <br /> S/o Late A.Krishnamurthy,R/at No.5/63-F-101, The Haven, 1st Main, Hanumagiri Extension, Padmanabhanagar, <br /> Bangalore-560061.<br /> <br /> (By Sri. S.S., Advocate)<br /> <br /> Vs. <br /> Opposite Party Secretary,<br /> M/s Sahyadri House Building Co-operative Society Ltd., No.3302, 2nd Cross, Kanakadasangara, Dattagalli, 3rd Stage, Mysore.<br /> <br /> (By Sri. A.S.K., Advocate)<br /> <br /> Nature of complaint : Deficiency in service<br /> Date of filing of complaint : 06.05.2010<br /> Date of appearance of O.P. : 21.05.2010<br /> Date of order : 08.07.2010<br /> Duration of Proceeding : 1 MONTHS 13 DAYS<br /> <br /> <br /> PRESIDENT <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> MEMBER<br /> <br /> <br /> MEMBER<br /> <br /> <br /> Sri. A.T.Munnoli,<br /> President<br /> <br /> 1. The complainant has filed the complaint against the opposite party, alleging deficiency in housing service and has sought a direction to the opposite party to refund advance amount paid towards allotment of site with interest at the rate of 18% p.a. and cost of the proceedings.<br /> <br /> 2. The opposite party in the version admitted that, the complainant-member has paid the first installment. But, contended that, most of the members, have not paid the amount and the amount that was collected from the remaining members has been invested to acquire the land for formation of the sites and further, it is contended that, the complainant has not paid the second installment and that, the complainant is not entitled for refund of the amount with interest.<br /> <br /> 3. In support of their respective contentions, both parties have filed their affidavits and produced certain documents. We have heard the arguments of learned advocates for the complainant and the opposite party and perused the records. <br /> <br /> 4. Now, we have to consider, whether the complainant has proved any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party and that he is entitled to any reliefs?<br /> <br /> 5. Our finding is partly in affirmative, for the following reasons.<br /> <br /> REASONS<br /> <br /> 6. It is the fact that, the complainant is one of the members of the opposite party housing society and towards allotment of site apart from membership fees, the complainant has paid a sum of Rs.1,35,000/- out of the total cost of the site Rs.4,50,000/-. <br /> 7. The complainant has specifically alleged in the complaint and stated in the affidavit that, the opposite party society had agreed and assured to complete the formation of the layout and allot a site measuring 30’ x 40’. But, the opposite party even has not taken constructive steps in the matter. It is stated that, the complainant made repeated requests and even notice was sent, but, there is no response from the opposite party. The claim of the complainant that, the opposite party had assured to allot site to the complainant within 24 months, is not at all denied or disputed by the opposite party. The complainant has paid a sum of Rs.1,35,000/- to the opposite party society towards first installment for allotment of the site. More than two years has been elapsed. Admittedly, till today layout has not been formed. Hence, prima-facie, deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party society is established.<br /> <br /> 8. The opposite party has contended that, in all there are 566 members and out of them, only 83 members have paid first installment and remaining members in spite of requests have not paid the amount. The fact that, remaining members have not paid the amount, is no ground to deny the reliefs of the complainant. It is look out of the opposite party society. Because, remaining members have not paid the amount, the complainant shall not suffer. How the things should be managed, is for the opposite party society.<br /> <br /> 9. Further, opposite party contended that, the complainant has not paid the second installment. Nothing is placed on record by the opposite party, when the complainant was required to pay the second installment and whether, any notice in this regard was served on the complainant. Moreover, in the absence of any constructive steps taken by the opposite party society in formation of the layout, it is but, natural that, the complainant may not be ready to pay further amount. Of course, in the case on hand, firstly demanding that amount, there is no cogent evidence and in the absence of demand and fulfilling other terms and conditions, it cannot be taken that, the complainant has failed to pay the amount.<br /> <br /> 10. As regards interest, deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party having been proved, the complainant is entitled to it. As regards the rate, Hon’ble National Commission as well as Hon’ble Apex Court have allowed interest at the rate of 18% p.a. In the case on hand, admittedly advance paid by the complainant to the opposite party society has been used for acquiring land by the society and taking into consideration of deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party and that rise in the price of the sites, we feel that the claim of interest at the rate of 18% is just and reasonable.<br /> <br /> 11. Learned advocate for the opposite party submitted that, formation of layout is in progress and there is likelihood of solving all problems and the opposite party society is ready and willing to allot site to the complainant as per the rules, on seniority. He also submitted that, all the amount that the society has collected from the members has been invested for acquiring the land. In view of the submission and the assurance made, we feel it just to grant some time to the opposite party society for completion of the layout and allotment of the sites, failing which to direct to refund the amount with interest.<br /> <br /> 12. Accordingly, we answer the point partly in affirmative.<br /> <br /> ORDER<br /> <br /> 1. The Complaint is partly allowed.<br /> 2. The opposite party is hereby directed to complete the formation of layout with all civic amenities and allot a site measuring 30’ x 40’ to the complainant within three months from the date of this order.<br /> 3. If the above order is complied with by the opposite party, the complainant shall pay the balance amount to the opposite party society and on receiving the said amount, the opposite party society shall execute registered sale deed in respect of site allotted in favour of the complainant at his costs, within a month from the date of receipt of the amount. <br /> 4. If, the opposite party is not able to allot a site and execute sale deed in favour of the complainant as ordered above, then it is hereby directed to refund the advance amount of Rs.1,35,500/- to the complainant with interest at the rate of 18% p.a. from 05.05.2008 till realization, within six months from the date of this order.<br /> 5. Also, opposite party to pay a sum of Rs.2,000/- to the complainant towards cost of the proceedings.<br /> 6. Give a copy of this order to each party according to Rules.<br /> (Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by her, transcript revised by us and then pronounced in the open Forum on this the day 8th July 2010)<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> (A.T.Munnoli) <br /> President <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> (Y.V.Uma Shenoi)<br /> Member<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> (Shivakumar.J.)<br /> Member<br /> <br />