Haryana

Sonipat

CC/132/2015

ANURADHA AGGARWAL W/O SH. SANJEEV AGGARWAL - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/S T.D.I. INFRASTRUCTURE LTD. - Opp.Party(s)

ASHISH GARG

03 May 2016

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SONEPAT.

 

 

                                Complaint No.132 of 2015

                                Instituted on:21.04.2015

                                Date of order: 03.05.2016

 

 

Anuradha Aggarwal wife of Sanjeev Aggarwal, r/o H.No.M-164, Vasundhara Appt. Sector 9, Rohini, Delhi-95.

    

                                           ...Complainant.

 

                        Versus

 

M/s TDI Infrastructure Ltd., (Formerly M/s Intime Promoters (P) Ltd., 9, Kasturba Gandhi Marg, New Delhi-01

Also At

10, Shaheed Bhagat Singh Marg, Gole Market, New Delhi

 

                                           ...Respondent.

 

 

COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 12 OF

THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,1986

 

Argued by: Sh. Ashish Garg Adv. for complainant.

           Sh. Virender Tyagi, Adv. for respondent.

          

BEFORE-  NAGENDER SINGH, PRESIDENT.

        SMT.PRABHA WATI, MEMBER.

       

 

O R D E R

 

 

          Complainant has filed the present complaint against the respondent alleging therein that initially Mamta Aggarwal booked a residential flat measuring 1800-2000 Sq. feet at the rate of Rs.1450/- per sq. feet  and Rs.5 lacs  vide receipt dated 20.2.2006 to the respondent were paid.  In the month of 2/2007, the said Mamta Aggarwal  due to some unavoidable circumstances assigned all her rights in favour of the complainant and necessary changes has already been done in the company record.  So, as per demand of the respondent, the complainant has paid the installment of Rs.3,50,000/- vide receipt no.60313 dated 9.2.2007. Despite receipt of Rs.8,50,000/- till 2/2007, the respondent has not allotted the flat to the complainant.   There is an inordinate delay in handing over the possession of the flat.  In November,2014, the complainant alongwith her husband visited the office of the respondent, where the official of the respondent misbehaved with them and he openly said that the company will not allot any flat and the deposit amount has been forfeited.  The respondent

has committed a big fraud as in the year 2006, they have taken the bookings of flat in large number although they do not have any requisite land and they intentionally not allotted the flats to all the booking holders.  The complainant has served the respondent with legal notice dated 15.12.2014  requesting the respondent to immediately allot the flat in block A, B and C or at other fully constructed block and also to make the payment of penalty of delay construction as interest at the rate of 18% per annum on total deposited amount of Rs.8,50,000/- from 2009(three years after the date of booking) till the date of possession and further adjust the penalty/compensation amount in the balance sale consideration of flat, but the said legal notice has not brought any fruitful result and that amounts to a grave deficiency in service on the part of the respondent. So, she has come to this Forum and has filed the present complaint.

 

2.        In reply, the respondent has submitted that in the year 2006 one Smt. Mamta Aggarwal approached the respondent and moved an application for a residential unit in the project of the company. The booking rate was Rs.1600/- PSF (basic cost) which includes EDC, IDC and other statutory levies etc.  The size of the said flat was 1800 to 2000 sq. feet.  The respondent vide letter dated 19.8.2011 offered allotment of flat in existing tower S,W which was at advance stage of construction or in tower U4, U5, Y1 and Y2 where the construction work had already started.  Despite due offer, the complainant did not turn up to get the allotment of flat.  The complainant infact was not interested in getting the allotment.  False and baseless allegations have been leveled by the complainant against the respondent.  There is no deficiency in service on the part of the respondent and thus, the complainant is not entitled for any relief and compensation and prayed for the dismissal of the present complaint.

 

3.        We have heard the ld. Counsel for both the parties at length and we have also gone through the entire relevant

material available on the case file carefully & minutely.

 

4.         Ld. Counsel for the complainant has argued that the respondent is utilizing the huge amount of Rs.8,50,000/- of the complainant without providing her any services. The respondent has not allotted the flat to the complainant.   There is an inordinate delay in handing over the possession of the flat.  The complainant in November, 2014 alongwith her husband visited the office of the respondent, where the official of the respondent misbehaved with them and he openly said that the company will not allot any flat and the deposit amount has been forfeited.  The respondent has committed a big fraud as in the year 2006, they have taken the bookings of flat in large number although they do not have any requisite land and they intentionally not allotted the flats to all the booking holders.  The complainant has served the respondent with legal notice dated 15.12.2014  requesting the respondent to immediately allot the flat in block A, B and C or at other fully constructed block and also to make the payment of penalty of delay construction as interest at the rate of 18% per annum on total deposited amount of Rs.8,50,000/- from 2009(three years after the date of booking) till the date of possession and further adjust the penalty/compensation amount in the balance sale consideration of flat, but the said legal notice has not brought any fruitful result and that amounts to a grave deficiency in service on the part of the respondent.

 

           Ld. Counsel for the respondent has argued that in the year 2006 one Smt. Mamta Aggarwal approached the respondent and moved an application for a residential unit in the project of the company. The booking rate was Rs.1600/- PSF (basic cost) which includes EDC, IDC and other statutory levies etc.  The size of the said flat was 1800 to 2000 sq. feet.  The respondent vide letter dated 19.8.2011 offered allotment of flat in existing tower S,W which was at advance stage of construction or in tower U4, U5, Y1 and Y2 where the construction work had already started.  Despite due offer, the complainant did not turn up to get the allotment of flat.  The complainant infact was not interested in getting the allotment.  False and baseless allegations have been leveled by the complainant against the respondent.  There is no deficiency in service on the part of the respondent and thus, the complainant is not entitled for any relief and compensation.

 

5.        After hearing both the learned counsel for the parties at length and after going through the entire relevant records available on the case file very carefully, we are of the view that there is no dispute with regard to the fact that Rs.8,50,000/- are lying deposited with the respondent. Ld. Counsel for the respondent has submitted while relying on the letter dated 19.8.2011 Annexure R-1 that the respondent was in process of giving the allotment in existing towers S/W which were already at an advance stage of construction or in tower U4, U5, Y1 and Y2 where the construction has already started. The complainant was also requested to come forward for getting the allotment in the said towers on or before 31.8.2011 since it was a limited period offer on first cum first serve basis. 

          But in our view, the respondent cannot get the benefit of this letter because from the contents of the letter, it is clear that it was limited period offer.  This letter is of dated 19.8.2011 and this limited period offer was upto 31.8.2011.  In our view, if the complainant has not come forward to accept the limited period offer, then also the respondent cannot take the benefit of this letter, because thereafter also, the respondent has not taken any action for returning the amount of the complainant, rather they kept on utilizing the huge amount of the complainant for their personal gain and without providing any services to the complainant.

 

          In the present case, the respondent has filed the written statement, affidavit Ex.RW1/A of Tejinder Rathi and has placed on record the copy of letter dated 19.8.2011 (Annexure R1) and copy of courier receipt Annexure R2.

 

          The respondent has tried his level best to make the things justified and has also tried his level best to shift their wrong acts and deeds upon the complainant, who even after deposit of huge amount with the respondent, is roaming here and there and further due to the deficiency in services rendered by the respondent, the complainant has to knock the doors of this Forum for the redressal of her grievances.  In our view, the ends of justice would be fully met if the directions to refund the amount alongwith interest is given to the respondent because the respondent is utilizing the huge amount of the complainant for the last many years without providing any services to the complainant.  Accordingly, we hereby direct the respondent to refund the amount of Rs.8,50,000/- (Rs.eight lacs fifty thousand) to the complainant alongwith interest at the rate of 09% per annum from the date of its deposit till its actual realization and further to pay compensation to the complainant to the tune of Rs.five thousand for rendering deficient services, harassment and further to pay a sum of Rs.two thousand under the head of litigation expenses.

 

         With these observations, findings and directions, the present complaint stands allowed.

 

          Certified copy of this order be provided to both the parties free of cost.

 

File be consigned to the record-room.

 

 

(Prabha Wati)           (Nagender Singh-President)

Member DCDRF                DCDRF, Sonepat.

 

Announced: 03.05.2016