Chandigarh

DF-II

CC/233/2021

Baljit Kaur - Complainant(s)

Versus

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

Bhupinder Ghai adv

15 Mar 2024

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION-II

U.T. CHANDIGARH

 

Consumer Complaint No.	:	233/2021
Date of Institution	:	07.04.2021
Date of Decision	:	15.03.2024

 

                                 

             

Baljit Kaur wife of Sh. Kamikar Singh aged about 60 Years, resident of House No. 208, Jangeda Road, Ward No. 2, Ahmedgarh, Sangrur, Punjab.

...Complainant

Versus

1.     M/s Siswan Paradise Private Limited, through its Managing Director/Director/Authorized Signatory Present Address: Adab City Centre, SCO No. 3, Adjoining YES Bank, Opposite Subway and Café Coffee Day, Kharar Landran Road, Sector 114, Mohali. through its Managing Director,

 

2^nd Address :- SCO No. 46-47, 1 Floor, Sector 9-D,      Chandigarh.

 

3^rd  Address:- SCO No. 28-29-30, 2nd Floor, Sector 9-D,      Chandigarh

 

2.    M/s Emerging India Real Assets Pvt. Limited, through its Managing Director/Director/Authorized Signatory Sh. Gurpreet Singh Sidhu Present Address: Adab City Centre, SCO No. 3, Adjoining YES Bank, Opposite Subway and Café Coffee Day, Kharar Landran Road, Sector 114, Mohali.

 

2^nd Address SCO No. 46-47, 1 Floor, Sector 9-D,   Chandigarh.

3.    Emerging India Housing Corporation (P) Ltd., through its Managing Director/Director/Authorized Signatory, Sh. Gurpreet Singh Sidhu Present Address: Adab City Centre, SCO No. 3, Adjoining YES Bank, Opposite Subway and Café Coffee Day, Kharar Landran Road, Sector 114, Mohali

 

2^nd Address SCO No. 46-47, 1st Floor, Sector 9-D,       Chandigarh

….Opposite Party(s)

 

BEFORE:
	SHRI AMRINDER SINGH SIDHU,	PRESIDENT
	SHRI B.M.SHARMA	MEMBER
Present:-
	Sh.Jatin, Adv. Proxy for Sh.Bhupinder Ghai, Counsel for complainant OPs exparte.

      

ORDER BY AMRINDER SINGH SIDHU, M.A.(Eng.), LLM, PRESIDENT

1.        The complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, as amended up-to-date pleading therein that being allured by the brochures and pamphlets of the OPs, the complainant applied for a cottage farmhouse measuring 605 sq. yards in the project of the OPs known as “Siswan Paradise” at Village Mirzapur, Tehsil Kharar, District SAS Nagar,  Mohali vide application No.74030 by paying entire payment Rs.4.50,000/- as per plan B against receipt dated 11.06.2012 (Annexure C-2) for his personal use and occupation of her family members. The OPs have also executed the sale deed dated 30.10.2012 (Annexure C-3 Colly.) in favour of the complainant without any demarcation and cottage numbers.  It has further been averred that the OPs have not taken any permission from the GMADA nor they have got CLU for selling the plots and as such they have played a fraud with the public.  Subsequently, the complainant sought the refund of the deposited amount along with interest but the same has not been refunded despite the requests. Alleging that the aforesaid acts of omission and commission on the part of the OPs amount to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice, the complainant has filed the instant complaint.      
2.        Despite due service through publication, the OPs failed to put in appearance and as a result thereof they were ordered to be proceeded against exparte vide order dated 26.05.2022
3. We have heard the proxy Counsel for the complainant and gone through the documents on file to dispose of the complaint.
4. In exparte evidence, the complainant has placed on record her duly sworn affidavit reiterating the averments made in the complaint.  Annexure C-1 is the copy of the payment plan. Annexure C-2 is the copy of the certificate vide which the complainant was allotted a cottage farm measuring 605 sq. yards in the draw of lots held on 14.06.2012 vide application No.74030 and she was allotted preference /docket No.SSWP-870. The complainant has also placed on record the copy of the sale deed dated 30.10.2012 in respect of the unit in question executed in her favour. The complainant has specifically deposed in the affidavit that the plot(s) were sold/marketed by the OPs without obtaining any license(s)/approval(s) from the competent authorities/GMADA and they have not taken the permission from the concerned authorities for selling the units/floors.  The OPs have failed to deliver the possession of the unit in question complete in all respects to the complainant so far.

              The Hon’ble National Commission, New Delhi in First Appeals bearing No.557 and 683 of 2003 titled as “Kamal Sood Vs. DLF Universal Ltd.” decided on 20.04.2007 has observed as under:-

   “It would be unfair trade practice, if the builder, without any planning and without obtaining any effective permission to construct building/ apartments, invites offers and collects money from the buyers. If the construction of the building/apartment is delayed, because of such delay, and the possession of the apartment is not delivered within the stipulated time, the builder would be liable to bear the escalation cost and not the buyer/consumer”.

5. The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Civil Appeal No.3533-3534 of 2017 – Fortune Infrastruture vs. Trevor’D Lima, decided on 12.3.2018 has observed that a person cannot be made to wait indefinitely for the possession of the flats allotted to them and they are entitled to seek the refund of the amount paid by them, along with compensation.
6. It may be stated here that the OPs did not appear to contest the case of the complainant and preferred to be proceeded against ex-parte. This act of the OPs draws an adverse inference that they have nothing to contradict in defence against the allegations made in the complaint. Therefore, the assertions of the complainant made in the complaint have gone un-rebutted & un-controverted.
7. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the considered view that the complainant cannot be made to wait for an indefinite period and OP No.1 who is not in a position to develop the project has no right to retain the hard earned money of the complainant. OP No.1 is, thus, proved deficient in rendering the services to the complainant.
8.        For the reasons recorded above, the present complaint is partly allowed qua OP-1. OP No.1 is directed to refund a sum of Rs.4,50,000/- to the complainant along with interest @ 10% p.a. from respective dates of its deposit till the date of its actual realization, subject to the condition that after receipt of the above awarded amount, the complainant shall be legally bound to execute registered Sale Deed in respect of the plot in question in favour of OP No.1-Company on account of receiving sale consideration from it.
9. The complaint qua OPs No.2 & 3 stands dismissed.
10. This order be complied with by OP No.1, within 90 days from the date of receipt of its certified copy, failing which the complainants shall be at liberty to get the order enforced through the indulgence of this Commission.
11.        The pending application(s) if any, stands disposed of accordingly.
12.        Certified copy of this order be communicated to the parties, free of charge. After compliance file be consigned to record room.

Announced in open Commission 15.03.2024
	Sd/- (AMRINDER SINGH SIDHU) PRESIDENT
	Sd/-
	(B.M.SHARMA) MEMBER