Delhi

New Delhi

CC/50/2017

Vinay Aggarwal - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s Star Facilities Management Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

15 Feb 2022

ORDER

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION­­­-VI, DISTT.NEW DELHI, M-BLOCK, VIKAS BHAWAN, NEW DELHI-110002.

 

CC No.50/2017

IN THE MATTER OF:

 

1. VINAY AGGARWAL

S/O SH. MADAN GOPAL AGGARWAL,

R/O B-50, ASHOK VIHAR, PHASE-1,

DELHI-110052.

 

2.  MADAN GOPAL AGGARWAL,

S/O LATE R.K. AGGARWAL

R/O B-50, ASHOK VIHAR, PHASE-1,

DELHI-110052                                                    … COMPLAINANTS

      

VERSUS

 

1. M/S STAR  FACILITIES MANAGEMENT LTD.

 1110, ANSAL BHAWAN,

16, KASTURBA GANDHI MARG,

 NEW DELHI-110001

 

2.  ANSAL PROPERTIES AND INFRASTRUCTURE LTD.

115, ANSAL BHAWAN,

16, KASTURBA GANDHI MARG,

NEW DELHI-110001                          … OPPOSITE PARTY(IES)

 

 

CORAM : SH. POONAM CHAUDHRY, PRESIDENT

                SH. BARIQ AHMAD, MEMBER

      MS. ADARSH NAIN, MEMBER   

                                                      Date of Institution: 23.01.2017

                                                                  Date of decision:15.02.2022

BARIQ AHMAD, MEMBER

ORDER

1. The complainants have filed the present complaint against the OPs under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The facts as alleged in the complaint are that the complainant No.1 and No.2 have purchased  residential plots No.B-1826 and plot No.1827 respectively from OP-2 at Ansal Sushant City, Sonipat, Haryana and the complainants have entered into a maintenance agreement  with OP-1 for the proper maintenance of the common area of the entire project as mentioned above and pay the maintenance charges on monthly basis in lieu of the services provided. The complainant further alleged that both the complainant had paid maintenance charges of Rs.6096/- vide receipt No.132976-132977 dated 29.04.2013 upto 31.03.2014.The total maintenance outstanding @ Rs.3277.50 charged per quarter is Rs.11,395/- till 01.01.2015 as per letter dated 01.01.2017 of OP-1. It is further alleged that the complainants had availed one fixed deposit scheme invited from general public by the OP-2 wherein they had deposit of a sum of Rs.1,78,000/- and accordingly a FD No.B1 96565 was issued in favor of “Madan Gopal & Aggarwal & Sons, HUF” on 20.03.2014 with maturity date being 06.03.2015 and maturity amount being Rs.2,00,578/- on maturity of the above said FDR the complainant No.2 who is Karta of HUF had been requesting of the refund of the amount, the complainant also made written request, reminders and made personal visits, but No.2 failed for refund the matured amount. It is further alleged that the OP-1 has been illegally increasing maintenance charges exorbitantly from the last some years without any consent or approval from the plot owners. They had increased maintenance from 1.95 per day to 2.5 per sq mtr to 4.35 per sq mtr.. On these allegations the complainant has filed the complaint praying for refund the FDR amount of Rs.1,78,000/- along with penal interest of 18% till date  with  Rs.50,000/- as compensation towards mental harassment and cost of litigation from the OP`s .
2. Notice of the complaint was sent to the OP`s. OP`s have been contesting the case and have filed written statement. In the joint reply, OPs submitted that the complaint is not maintainable, it is false, wrong and baseless and the same is liable to be dismissed as there is no deficiency in service on their part. OPs further submitted that the complainant`s does not fall within the definition of the term consumer as defined under section 2(1)(d) of the CP Act,1986 as the complainant`s are not consumers but they are investors. It is also stated that the complainants had availed one fixed deposit scheme invited from general public by the OP-2 wherein the complainants had deposited a sum of Rs.1,78,000/- and accordingly a FD No.B1 96565 was issued in favor of “Madan Gopal & Aggarwal & Sons, HUF” on 20.03.2014 with maturity date being 06.03.2015 and maturity amount being Rs.2,00,578/-. It was further stated that the OP-1 had filed a Company petition before Company Law Board seeking extension of time for repayment of the deposits, vide order dated 30.12.2014 OP-2 to make the repayments of the fixed deposits as per the repayment scheme sanctioned by the CLB. Vide order dated 13.01.2017 of the NCLT, the liability of the OP-2 to pay the interest amount was extended till June,2017 and the principal amount was liable to be repaid thereafter, on first-in-first-out basis along with the accrued interest. It is stated on 17.08.2017, the OP-2 had paid an amount of Rs.55,193/- to the complainants and an outstanding amount of Rs.1,98,320/- remains due and payable to the complainants. It further stated that the OP-2 has been making the payments to all the fixed deposit holders in conformity with the aforesaid orders of CLB and NCLT and there has been no willful neglect or default on its part as alleged by the complainant. It was further stated that the complainants have paid only a sum of Rs.6,096/- in advance to OP-1 on 29.04.2013 towards maintenance charges, as payable upto 31.03.2014. The complainants have not bothered to pay the applicable maintenance charges to OP-1 payable since 01.04.2013. It was stated that  the increase in maintenance charges over the years have not been arbitrary but rather based on external factors and in time with prevalent market practice. It was further stated that the complainants had executed two separate plot Buyer Agreements dated 23.03.2009 with respect to Plot No.B-1826 and B-1827 and were bound by the terms and conditions of the same. The complainants are simply trying to avoid his liability to pay the maintenance charges by filling this false and frivolous complaint, it is prayed that complaint be dismissed.

4.       In the rejoinder averments made in the complaint were reaffirmed and averments in written statement were denied/controvert.

5.       In order to prove his case the complainant No.1 and No.2 have filed evidence by affidavits, again reiterating the contents of the complaint. The complainant also placed on record copy of demand notice dated 26.07.2016 sent to the complainant by OP, Copy of two latter of complainants dated 17.10.2016 with speed postal receipt dated 28.10.2017 sent to OP. Copy of an affidavit of complainant dated 19.01.2017. On the other hand right to file Op`s evidence was closed vide order dated 11.05.2018. OP had filed the copy of plot Buyer Agreements dated 23.03.2009 with respect to Plot No.B-1826 and B-1827 with written statement, Copy of the order dated 30.12.2014 passed by CLB, New Delhi, Copy of the order dated 13.07.2017 passed by National Company Law Tribunal.

7.     We have heard argument advance at the Bar and have perused the evidence and materials on record.  The case of the complainants has remained consistent. There is nothing on record to disbelieve the case of the complainants, OP-2 in their written statement admitted that the complainant No.1 and No.2 have purchased residential plots No.B-1826 and plot No.1827 respectively from OP-2 at Ansal Sushant City, Sonipat, Haryana and the complainants have entered into a maintenance agreement  with OP-1 to seek the proper maintenance of the common area of the entire project. It is further admitted that the complainants had availed one fixed deposit scheme invited from general public by the OP-2 wherein the complainants had deposit a sum of Rs.1,78,000/- and accordingly a FD No.B1 96565 was issued in favor of “Madan Gopal & Aggarwal & Sons, HUF” on 20.03.2014 with maturity date being 06.03.2015 and maturity amount being Rs.2,00,578/- the complainants have paid only a sum of Rs.6,096/- in advance, to OP-1 on 29.04.2013 towards maintenance charges, as payable upto 31.03.2014. During course of arguments complainant also point out that the OP company is still earning profits and hence, there is availability of cash in the company further, the Chairman, Vice Chairman, Executive Directors and non-Executive Directors have been drawing their salaries and perks hence, the OP No.2 is liable to refund the FDR amount with interest to the complainants. Having considered the averments made in the complaint, objections, arguments and affidavit, it is clear that being the public limited and listed company, the OP Company has accepted fixed deposits from the public. The OP-2 company had not been repaying the principal sums of fixed deposit and interest accrued thereon to the complainants as per orders of Hon`ble Company Law Board  dated 30.12.2014 as per Clause (VII) The fixed deposits becoming due for payment on or after 01.04.2014 and having principal amount of Rs.1,25,001/- or more, will be paid in two years from the date of maturity in the manner mentioned herein below:-

1. 35% of the amount within 10 working days after one year (12 months) from the date of maturity;
2. 65% of the amount within 10 working days after two years (24 months) from the date of maturity.

 And thereafter, as per order dated 13.07.2017 passed by National Company Law Tribunal. However, the OP-2 company did not adhere to the above said guidelines in implementing the scheme of refund. As the FDR had matured in the year 2014, there is a failure to comply with the order/repayment scheme to make the payment of fixed deposits. The complainant No.2 i.e. Madan Gopal  Aggarwal, is senior citizen aged about 71 years as on today.  The OP-2 also did not adhere to the directions passed by CLB and NCLT in this regard to cases like serious illness, senior citizen above 65 years of age.  Accordingly, the OP-1 & OP-2 jointly or severally are held guilty of deficiency in service.

8.   Accordingly, the OP-1 & OP-2 jointly or severally are directed as under:

i)     To refund the fixed deposit amount Rs.1,98,320/-  with interest @9% per annum for the date of  fixed deposit from the date of fixed deposit till payment.

ii)       To pay an amount of Rs.25,000/- to the complainant as compensation towards mental agony and harassment caused to the complainant which includes cost of litigation.

9.    The above order shall be complied by OP-1 & OP-2 within 30 days from the date of receiving copy of this order and awarded amount shall be paid to the complainant within 30 days from the date of receiving copy of this order failing which OP-1 & OP-2 shall be liable to pay interest on the entire awarded amount @ 9% per annum from the date of receiving copy of this order till the date of payment. If OP-1 & OP-2 fail to comply the order within 30 days from the date of receiving copy of this order, the complainant may approach this Commission as per The CP Act.

10.     Let a copy of this order be given/sent to each party free of cost as per regulation of the Consumer Protection Regulations. Thereafter file be consigned to record room.

          Announced on this  15^th day of February, 2022.

 

 

 

MS.POONAM CHAUDHRY

(PRESIDENT)

 

 

 SH. BARIQ AHMAD                                                     MS. ADARSH NAIN          

    (MEMBER)                                                                          (MEMBER)