Chandigarh

DF-I

CC/413/2014

Rajnish Kumar Jindal - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s UK Homes Pvt Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Rajnish.K.Jindal & Harinder S. Gill

21 Aug 2015

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-I, U.T. CHANDIGARH

============

Consumer Complaint  No	:	CC/413/2014
Date  of  Institution	:	24/06/2014
Date   of   Decision	:	21/08/2015

 

 

 

 

 

1.   Rajnish Kumar Jindal, resident of H.No.3230, Paradise Enclave, Sector 50-D, Chandigarh.

 

2.   Khushdeep Singh Walia, resident of H.No.3230, Paradise Enclave, Sector 50-D, Chandigarh.

 

….Complainants

Vs.

 

1.   M/s U.K. Homes Pvt. Limited, SCO 68-69-70, Level-IV, Sector 17-C, Chandigarh, through its Managing Director Mr. Uday Raj.

 

2.   Uday Raj, Managing Director, M/s U.K. Homes Pvt. Limited, SCO 68-69-70, Level-IV, Sector 17-C, Chandigarh.

 

3.   Karan Deep, Director, M/s U.K. Homes Pvt. Limited, SCO 68-69-70, Level-IV, Sector 17-C, Chandigarh.

 

…… Opposite Parties

 

 

BEFORE:   MRS.SURJEET KAUR             PRESIDING MEMBER

          SH. SURESH KUMAR SARDANA     MEMBER

 

 

For Complainants	:	Complainants in person.
For OP Nos.1 & 2	:	None.
For OP No.3	:	Ex-parte.

 

PER SURJEET KAUR, PRESIDING MEMBER

 

 

 

          The facts, in brief, are that the complainants, booked a residential plot, measuring 200 sq. yards, with the Opposite Parties, in their project, launched by them, under the name and style of Capital Greens on Zirakpur Patiala Highway, Village Karala, Tehsil Banur, Distt. Mohali (Punjab), on payment of Rs.3.00 lacs, as booking amount on 29.05.2012 (Receipt Annexure C-1). Thereafter, vide letter dated 16.06.2012 Annexure C-2, the Opposite Parties informed the complainants that they had been granted approvals/ sanctions, in respect of the project, in question. As such, the Opposite Parties made a demand of more amount, to be deposited towards part price of the unit, in question. When the complainants were about to make payment of the next installment, towards part price of the said unit,  they came to know that there was something suspicious, in respect of the said project of the Opposite Parties. As such, they approached the office of the Opposite Parties, and requested them to show the plot. However, to the utter surprise of the complainants, they were shown an agriculture field, by the Opposite Parties, which area was too far away from the site, which was originally shown to them. Finally the complainants came to know that the Opposite Parties, did not obtain any permissions/approvals from the Competent Authorities, even to launch the project, in question, what to speak of delivery of possession of the plot, in question, to them.  Ultimately, the complainants tried to approach the Opposite Parties, a number of times to refund the amount deposited by them, but to no avail. It has been asserted that the Opposite Parties collected the huge amount of Rs.3 lacs, towards earnest money, in respect of the plot, in question, but they did not abide by their commitment of allotment of the same. Annexure C-3 dated 09.02.2014 is the legal notice sent through registered post which was also not replied by the Opposite Parties. When the grievance of the complainants, was not redressed, left with no alternative, a complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter to be called as the Act only), has been filed, claiming various reliefs.    

  

2.     Notice of the complaint was sent to Opposite Parties, seeking their version of the case. However, nobody appeared on behalf of Opposite Party No.3 despite service, therefore, it was proceeded ex-parte on 22.09.2014.

 

3.     Opposite Parties No.1 & 2 in their joint written statement, while admitting the factual matrix of the case, have pleaded that the Complainants had paid the booking amount of Rs.3,00,000/- only and thereafter, did not pay even a single penny, despite various requests made by the answering Opposite Parties, thereby violating the fundamental principles of agreement and let the answering Opposite Parties to suffer a huge financial loss. It has been asserted that no false assurance had been given by the Opposite Parties and it was clearly informed to the Buyers that the answering Opposite Parties were in the process of fulfilling the legal formalities. It has been admitted that the answering Opposite Parties were owners of the land measuring 125 acres and the CLU and other approvals have been granted later on by the appropriate authorities. Receipt of alleged legal notice has been denied by the Opposite Parties. Denying all other allegations and stating that there is no deficiency in service on their part, answering Opposite Parties have prayed for dismissal of the complaint. 

 

4.     Parties were permitted to place their respective evidence on record in support of their contentions.

 

5.     We have heard the Complainants in person and have also perused the record, along with the written arguments advanced by the Complainants, with utmost care and circumspection. 

 

6.     The stand taken by Opposite Parties No.1 & 2 in their written statement is that Complainants are violating the fundamental principles of agreement. It has been urged by the Opposite Parties No.1 & 2 that Complainants did not pay even a single penny despite various requests made by them. It has also been asserted that it was clearly informed to the buyers that they (OPs No.1 & 2) were in the process of fulfilling the legal formalities.

 

7.     Pertinently, the Opposite Party No.3 chose not to appear before this Forum and was proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 22.09.2014. Therefore, the evidence produced by the Complainants has gone unrebutted. As per the version of Opposite Parties No. 1 & 2 the Complainants did not pay single penny after the deposit of booking amount of Rs.3,00,000/- despite various requests, but Opposite Parties No.1 & 2 have not produced any such document to prove that they assured the Complainant for further progress of the project. Admittedly, even after taking the booking amount from the Complainants the Opposite Parties No.1 & 2 were still occupied in fulfilling the legal formalities, meaning thereby they charged money from the Complainants even in the absence of necessary Govt. approvals to proceed with such a big project. Even during the proceedings of the present case, Opposite Parties No.1 & 2 were provided sufficient time/ opportunity to place on record necessary documents and evidence but they have miserably failed to prove their case. We are of the view that if the Opposite Parties were not in a position to hand over possession of the Plot to the Complainants, they should have refunded the amount deposited by the Complainants to them with interest at the earliest but they have failed to do so. The Opposite Parties have utilized the amount deposited by the Complainants for their use and must have got appreciation on the same. The Complainants are not expected to wait indefinitely for no fault of theirs. Hence, the Opposite Parties are proved to be deficient in rendering proper service and the present Complaint deserves to be partly allowed.

 

8.     In view of the above discussion, the Complaint is partly allowed. The Opposite Parties are directed, jointly and severally, as under:-

 

 [a] To refund the amount of Rs.3,00,000/- to the Complainants along with interest @12% per annum from the respective date(s) of deposit, till realization;

 

[b]  To pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation for mental agony & harassment suffered by the complainants;

 

[c]  To pay Rs.10,000/- as costs of litigation.

 

         The Opposite Parties No.1 & 2 are directed to pay the costs of Rs.500/- imposed vide order dated 19.05.2015. 

 

9.     The above said order shall be complied within 30 days of its receipt by the Opposite Parties; thereafter, they shall pay the amount at Sr.No.[b] above with interest @12% per annum from the date of filing of the present Complaint, till realization, besides complying with the directions at Sr.No.[a] and [c] above.

 

10.     The certified copy of this order be sent to the parties free of charge, after which the file be consigned.

Announced

21^st August, 2015                                       Sd/-

(SURJEET KAUR)

PRESIDING MEMBER

 

                                                  Sd/-

(SURESH KUMAR SARDANA)

“Dutt”                                                                                MEMBER