Delhi

StateCommission

CC/1272/2015

SUJATA SAINI - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/S TDI INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD. & ANR. - Opp.Party(s)

HARSH PAREKH

19 Jan 2016

ORDER

IN THE STATE COMMISSION: DELHI

(Constituted under Section 9 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986)

                                                                    Date of Arguments: 19.01.2016                                             Date of Decision: 21.01.2016

1. Complaint Case No. 1270/2015

In the matter of:

Sh. Yash Pal Saini

S/o Sh. Naranjan Dass

R/o G-55, Pushkar Enclave

Paschim Vihar

New Delhi-110063                                                ...........Complainant

 

Versus

 

1. M/s TDI Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd.

through its Managing Director:

Sh. Ravinder Kumar Taneja

and Chairman/Director Sh. Devki Nandan Taneja

having its Corporate Office at:

Upper Ground Floor, Vandana Building

11, Tolstoy Marg, Connaught Place

New Delhi-110001

 

2. State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur

through its Chief Manager (Maintenance)

RASMECCC, ZONAL OFFICE

Ahimsa Bhawan, Shankar Road

New Rajender Nagar

New Delhi-110060                                       ..........Opposite Parties                                                         

2. Complaint Case No. 1272/2015

Smt. Sujata Saini

W/o Yash Pal Saini

R/o G-55, Pushkar Enclave

Paschim Vihar

New Delhi-110063                                                ...........Complainant

 

Versus

 

1. M/s TDI Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd.

through its Managing Director:

Sh. Ravinder Kumar Taneja

and Chairman/Director Sh. Devki Nandan Taneja

having its Corporate Office at:

Upper Ground Floor, Vandana Building

11, Tolstoy Marg, Connaught Place

New Delhi-110001

 

2. State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur

through its Chief Manager (Maintenance)

RASMECCC, ZONAL OFFICE

Ahimsa Bhawan, Shankar Road

New Rajender Nagar

New Delhi-110060                                       ..........Opposite Parties

 

CORAM

 

O P GUPTA                              -                  MEMBER (JUDICIAL)

S C JAIN                                 -                  MEMBER

 

1.         Whether reporters of local newspaper be allowed to see the judgment? Yes

2.         To be referred to the reporter or not? Yes

 

O P GUPTA -  MEMBER (JUDICIAL)

 

JUDGEMENT

Present:     Sh. Harsh Parikh, Counsel for the Complainants.

1.      These are two complaints. In complaint bearing No. 1270/2015, the complainant is Sh. Yash Pal Saini whereas in complaint bearing No. 1272/2015, the complainant is Mrs. Sujata Saini. Complainants of both the cases are husband and wife respectively. OPs in both the cases are same viz M/s TDI Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. and State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur.
2.      In complaint bearing No. 1270/2015, the case of the complainant is that he is a businessman and he decided to invest his money in some property as source of income that would generate livelihood and shelter for rest of his life. His sons went to United States of America for pursuing further studies and were not interested to join his business on return. He sold his Bhagirath Palace Sales Office on 08.02.2011 and invested in OP’s project to provide them basic accommodation on their return back to India and also adjust capital gain generated out of the sale of property.
3.      In complaint bearing No. 1272/2015, the plea of the complainant is that she is a businesswoman/professional designer and she decided that she would invest her money in some property as a source of income that would generate livelihood and shelter for rest of her life.
4.      The question which arises is whether complainants are ‘consumer’? A bare perusal of above reproduction of the cases of the complainants shows that the complainants invested their money in the OP’s project. Thus they are not purchaser for self occupation. They invested their money with a view to earn profit by selling the same when the prices increased.
5.      The cases are squarely covered by decision of the Hon’ble National Commission in Complaint Case No. 270/2013 titled as Madhu Sehgal and Anr. Vs. Omaxe Build Home Pvt. Ltd. decided on 20.03.2014. After placing reliance on earlier decision of Hon’ble National Commission in Chilkudi Adarsh Vs. ESSESS VEE SSV Construction III (2012) CPJ 315 where it was held that even when a consumer has booked more than one unit of residential premises, it amounts to booking of such premises for investment/commercial purpose, the complaint was dismissed.
6.      Similar view was taken by the Hon’ble National Commission in Jagmohan Chabbra & Anr. Vs. M/s DLF Universal Ltd. IV (2007) CPJ 1999. The said order was upheld by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 6030-6031/2008 decided on 29.09.2008.
7.      Similar view was taken by the Hon’ble National Commission in following cases:

1. Complaint Case No. 208/2012 titled as Saavi Gupta Vs. Omaxe Azorim Developers Pvt. Ltd. decided on 01.10.2012.
2. Consumer Case No. 307 to 309/2012 titled as Moran Plantation Pvt. Ltd. Vs. NBNs Pvt. Ltd. decided on 02.09.2013.

 

8.      Apart from the above fact, clause 30 of the builder buyer’s agreement filed by the complainant contains that possession was to be delivered within thirty months. In case of delay beyond said period the purchaser was entitled to delay penalty @ Rs. 5 per sq. ft.  The agreement is dated 02.09.2014 as per page C of the agreement. Thus the period of completion is yet to arrive. That is why the complainants have not prayed for possession. Otherwise the complaint would be premature.
9.      There is no clause for refund of the amount before the stipulated date for possession. Consequently, direction for waiving penalty and interest, direction to pay interest on sum paid by the complainant and damages is not maintainable. The complainants cannot seek any relief beyond agreement.
10.  Both the complaints are not maintainable. The same are dismissed in limini.
11. Copy of the order be made available to the parties free of costs as per rules and thereafter the file be consigned to Records.

 

 

(O P GUPTA)

MEMBER (JUDICIAL)
 

 

(S C JAIN)
MEMBER

 

6.