DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION SAS NAGAR (MOHALI)
Consumer Complaint No.823 of 2018
Date of institution: 07.08.2018 Date of decision : 09.11.2021
Smt. Najma wife of Shri Ateeq Ur Rehman, resident of House No.1303/23, Phase-XI, SAS Nagar (Mohali), Punjab.
…….Complainant
Versus
M/s. Sky Rock City Welfare Society, Banur Road, Back Side C.G.C. (College), Landran, Sector 111-112, SAS Nagar (Mohali) Punjab through its Proprietor Shri Navjit Singh
(presently confined in Maximum Security Jail, Nabha)
……..Opposite Party
Complaint under Consumer Protection Act.
Quorum: Shri Sanjiv Dutt Sharma, President.
Ms. Gagandeep Gosal, Member
Present: None for the complainant.
None for the OP.
Order dictated by :- Shri Sanjiv Dutt Sharma, President.
Order
The present order of ours will dispose of a complaint under the Consumer Protection Act, filed by the complainant (hereinafter referred as ‘CC’ for short) against the Opposite Party (hereinafter referred as ‘OP’ for short), on the ground that the CC approached the OP for purchasing 200 sq. yards plot in Sky Rock City Welfare Society, Banur Road, Back Side, C.G.C. Landran, Sector 111-112, SAS Nagar (Mohali) and paid Rs.5,000/- as initial amount in order to book a plot. Registration No.1065 with share No.Naj686234 for 200 sq. yards plot was allotted to the CC by the OP on 06.01.2012. It is alleged that the CC paid a sum of Rs.10,70,000/- to the OP on different dates. The rate of the plot was settled at Rs.4,000/- per sq. yard, which in total comes to Rs.8.00 lakhs alongwith other charges. The CC was given assurance that the plot will be given to her very soon but nothing was done by the OP in this regard. The CC was not even allowed to meet the Proprietor of the OP, despite her best efforts, since she wanted the refund of her amount. Later on the CC came to know that she was cheated by the OP as she was made to sign various documents in a fraudulent manner. As such she lost her hard earned money of Rs.10,70,000/- to the OP, moreover there was no plot in existence.
Thus, alleging deficiency in service on the part of the OPs, the CC has sought refund of Rs.10,70,000/- alongwith interest and compensation to the tune of Rs.50,000/- for harassment and mental agony. Complaint of the CC is duly signed and verified. Further the same is also supported by an affidavit of the CC.
2. In reply, the OP has raised a number of objections on the ground of cause of action etc. Number of other technical objections have also been raised by the OP. It is also averred that the matter can only be decided by the Civil Court. It is further averred that the OP is a society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 for which certificate of registration of society has been issued by the Registrar of Societies on 04.08.2010. Copy of certificate of registration as well as Memorandum of Society detailing aims and objects of the society attached with the reply. It is further averred that the society in question is an association of persons which has been formed for benevolent purpose i.e. for making available affordable housing to its members and executing works for their common interest. The Members of the society have got together to promote the economic interest of their members and have undertaken to strictly abide by the terms and conditions and are bound by the liabilities as far as they enjoys the rights flowing from their membership. It is averred that this being the position of fact qua the nature of the society registered under the Registration Act, constituted for promoting the interest of its members on no profit and no loss basis, the instant complaint is liable to be dismissed. It is further averred that the CC has failed to establish her locus in the nature of consumer to institute the present complaint. Further the OP has termed the complaint of the CC as false and frivolous. On merits, the averments of the complaint are denied. Surprisingly, the reply is signed by one Shri Ajay Singh and is not signed by Navjit Singh, President of the OP Society. Even the affidavit in support of the reply has also not been signed by Navjit Singh President nor has been attested by anybody. Thus, denying deficiency in service on its part, the OP has prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
3. The CC in support of her complaint submitted her affidavit and documents Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-6. On the other hand the OP has submitted unsigned and unattested affidavit of Navjit Singh its President alongwith documents Ex.OP-1 to Ex.OP-11.
4. It is important to mention here that this case pertains to the year 2018. Entire evidence of the parties is already on the file. Moreover, the case was continuously listed for arguments, but none has appeared on behalf of the OP. Since entire evidence of the parties is already on the file, we ourselves have gone through the record and are deciding the complaint on merits.
5. After perusal of the documents submitted by the CC and the OP, it is proved on file as also it is not denied by the OP that the CC has not paid an amount to the tune of Rs.10,70,000/- to the OP for purchase of plot of 200 sq. yards @ Rs.4,000/- per sq. yard situated in Sky Rock City Welfare Society, Banur Road, Back Side, C.G.C. Landran, Sector 111-112, SAS Nagar (Mohali). And also the CC paid Rs.5,000/- as initial amount for booking of the plot. It is admitted fact that Registration No.1065 with share No.Naj686234 for 200 sq. yards plot was issued to the CC by the OP on 06.01.2012, which clearly proves that the OP was supposed to provide a plot of 200 sq. yards to the CC. It is also proved on file that the CC paid a sum of Rs.10,70,000/- to the OP on different dates. It is also writ large that till date neither the plot has been given by the OP to the CC nor the amount is refunded despite several requests of the CC to the OP. The complaint is duly supported by affidavit of the CC which appears to be cogent, reliable and trustworthy.
6. On the other hand, the OP in its reply has raised frivolous, false, vague and absurd preliminary objections which make no sense at all. The OP has not uttered a single word regarding non acceptance of payment which was made to it by the CC. Very cleverly the reply has not been signed by anybody on behalf of the OP and even the affidavit of Navjit Singh President of the OP has not been signed or attested by anybody. This further shows the malafide intention of this builder/OP. It is pertinent to mention here that Navjit Singh, President of the OP is lodged in jail in various cases and even in one case in which he did not refund the amount, has been convicted and sentenced by this Consumer Commission to undergo imprisonment. We have also perused the documents submitted by the OP which are mostly even not legible.
7. We feel, that the very purpose of Consumer Protection Act will fail if such type of complaints are not allowed and such type of builders like the OP are allowed to part with money of innocent consumers. In this case also the OP has parted with huge amount of the CC to the tune of Rs.10,70,000/- since 2010 which is definitely hard earned money of the CC. There is definitely a continuous cause of action since neither the money was refunded to the CC nor possession of the plot was handed over to her at any point of time.
8. In view of above discussion, the present complaint is allowed. The OP is directed to refund an amount to the tune of Rs.10,70,000/- (Rs. Ten Lakhs Seventy Thousand only) alongwith interest @ 12% per annum from the dates of receiving the amount till actual refund. We further order the OP to pay a lump sum compensation amount to the tune of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rs. One Lakh only), to the CC towards compensation for harassment, mental agony and costs of litigation. We further order the OP to comply with the orders within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of free certified copy of this order. Free certified copies of this order be sent to the parties. File be indexed and consigned to record room.
Announced
November 09, 2021
(Sanjiv Dutt Sharma)
President
I agree.
(Ms. Gagandeep Gosal)
Member
