Chandigarh

DF-I

CC/878/2016

Mrs. Rama Garg - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s Siswan Paradise (P) Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Neeraj Sharma

20 Apr 2017

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-I,

U.T. CHANDIGARH

 

                               

Consumer Complaint No.	:	CC/878/2016
Date of Institution	:	28/09/2016
Date of Decision	:	20/04/2017

 

Mrs. Rama Garg, W/o Satish Kumar Garg, Resident of House No.76, Gulmohar Avenue, Dhakoli, Zirakpur.

…..Complainant

V E R S U S

1.     M/s Siswan Paradise (P) Limited, SCO No.46-47, First Floor, Sector 9-D, Chandigarh, through its Managing Director.

2.     M/s Emerging India Real Assets (P) Ltd., SCO No. 46-47, First Floor, Sector 9-D, Chandigarh, through its Managing Director.

3.     Sunihaar Properties, through Sh. Gagan Deep Rakhi, Resident of Flat No. 11 A, Aastha Homes, Opposite M.C. Park, Dhakoli (ECP of Siswan Paradise (P) Ltd.).

……Opposite Parties

 

QUORUM:	S.S. PANESAR	PRESIDENT
	SURJEET KAUR	MEMBER
	S.K. SARDANA	MEMBER

                                               

ARGUED BY	:	Sh. Rajesh Verma, Counsel for complainant
	:	OPs ex-parte

Per Surjeet Kaur, Member

1.         The facts, in brief, are that the Opposite Parties had launched a project namely, Siswan Paradise Pvt. Ltd. at Village Mirzapur. Allured by the representations made by the Opposite Parties, the Complainant booked a unit measuring 605 Sq. Yds. by paying an amount of 21,000/- on 09.06.2012, in the proposed project to be developed by the Opposite Parties for a total consideration of Rs.5,50,000/- and paid Rs.4,50,000/- in two installments on 28.08.2012 and 14.08.2013 as per the payment plan opted by her. It has been averred that after the Complainant was successful in the draw of lots on 14.6.2012, the Opposite Parties gave a Receipt vide which she was allotted Cottage Farm House Preference/ Docket No.SSWP-571. It has been alleged that in order to make full and final payment, as per the payment plan, when the Complainant went to the office of the Opposite Parties, to her astonishment, the Opposite Parties did not have their office at the address where it exists earlier. The Complainant found no one to receive the final payment. The Complainant neither received any communication from the Opposite Parties with regard to the full and final payment by way of last installment. It has been further alleged that the Opposite Parties have indulged in unfair trade practice by collecting the sale consideration of the Unit in question from the Complainant without approval, sanction and permission from the Govt. agencies concerned. The Complainant, therefore, withheld the last installment of Rs.1,00,000/- and demanded her money back with interest from the Opposite Parties, but to no success, as they kept on dilly dallying the matter on one pretext or the other. Alleging that the aforesaid acts amount to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the Opposite Parties, the complainant has filed the instant complaint.
2.         Opposite Parties No.1 & 3 did not appear despite service, therefore, they were proceeded ex-parte. 
3.         Initially, Sh. Harmandeep Singh, Auth. Representative put in appearance on behalf of Opposite Party No.2 and the case was adjourned for filing reply and evidence. However, on subsequently, neither the reply and evidence were filed nor anybody appeared on behalf of Opposite Party No.2, therefore, it was proceeded ex-parte.
4.         The complainant led evidence in support of her contentions. 
5.         We have gone through the record and heard the arguments addressed by the learned Counsel for the complainant.
6.         In the present case, the averments of the complaint have gone unrebutted in the absence of the Opposite Parties Nos.1 to 3 who were duly served and preferred neither to appear in person, nor through their Counsel. It is established beyond all reasonable doubt that the complaint of the Complainant is genuine. The Opposite Parties have certainly and definitely indulged into unfair trade practice by collecting the sale consideration of the Unit in question from the Complainant without approvals, sanctions and permissions from the concerned government agencies and as such, they cannot be allowed to usurp her hard earned money. The harassment suffered by the Complainant is also writ large. The Opposite Parties No.1 to 3 even did not bother to refund the amount paid by the Complainant despite her repeated endeavors. The Opposite Parties have utilized the amount deposited by the complainant for their use and must have got appreciation on the same. The Complainant is not expected to wait indefinitely for no fault of her.  Hence, there is deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties and they are liable to refund the amount deposited by the Complainant, along with compensation.
7.         In the light of above observations, the present complaint succeeds against the Opposite Parties No.1 to 3. The same is allowed qua them. We direct the Opposite Parties No.1 to 3 as under:- 

(i)    To refund the amount of Rs.4,71,000/- to the complainant.

(ii)   To pay Rs.25,000/- as compensation to the complainant for the unfair trade practice and harassment caused to her.

(iii)  To also pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- to the complainant as litigation expenses. 

8.         This order be complied with by Opposite Parties No. 1 to 3, jointly and severally, within one month from the date of receipt of its certified copy, failing which they shall make the payment of the amounts mentioned at Sr. No.(i) & (ii) above, with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of filing of the present complaint, till realization, apart from compliance of direction at Sr. No.(iii) above.
9.         The certified copy of this order be sent to the parties free of charge, after which the file be consigned.

	Sd/-	Sd/-	Sd/-
20/04/2017	[S.K.Sardana]	[SURJEET KAUR]	[S.S. PANESAR]
	Member	Member	President