Haryana

Ambala

CC/387/2017

Kanta Devi - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s Vatika Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

27 Nov 2017

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, AMBALA.

             Complaint Case No.: 387 of 2017.

Date of Institution   : 09.11.2017.

Date of Decision     : 27.11.2017

 

Kanta Devi age about 73 years w/o Sh.Tara Chand r/o 2689/2, Patel Road, Kaziwara Ambala City.

                                                                                                            ……Complainant

                                                Versus

 

1. M/s Vatika Ltd. Corporate Office Vatika Triangle, 5^th Flor, Sushant Lok, Phase 1, Block A, Mehrauli, Gurgram Road, Gurugram-122002 through its Managing Director.
2. M/s Vatika Limited through its Senior Manager (Marketing and Clients) Vatika City Central, Operations and Marketing Office, Sector 23, Opposite Rajiv Gandhi Sports Complex, Ambala City-134003.

                                                                                             ……Opposite Parties

 

Complaint Under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.

 

CORAM:        SH. D.N.ARORA, PRESIDENT.

                        SH. PUSHPENDER KUMAR, MEMBER.

                        MS.ANAMIKA GUPTA, MEMBER.

                       

Present:          Sh.Rajesh Sharma, counsel for complainant.

                         

ORDER

 

                        Complainant has filed the present complaint averring therein that   she bought plot No.4, Street D/12 in Sector 23 at Vatika City Central Ambala measuring 300 Sq. yards @ Rs.5877/- per square yard vide agreement dated 27.12.2011 for a sale consideration of Rs.20,65,200/-  from the OPs besides Rs.1007/- per square yards and now they have started charging Rs.1787/- per square yard. The project was launched in the year 2010 and the plot to the complainant was allotted on 27.12.2011 and the complainant has already paid sufficient amount i.e. Rs.15,85,980/- to the OPs. The OPs have put a condition upon the complainant that in case there is delay in making the payment of installments as per payment schedule the OPs shall claim interest @ 15 % per annum for the default in making the payment for beyond 90 days delay as per payment schedule @ 18 % per annum as per clause 6 of payment schedule of buyer’s agreement dated 27.12.2011. The OPs were to offer the possession complete in all respect till 26.12.2014 but no development activities are going on despite the fact that the complainant has already paid Rs.15,85,980/- to the OPs. Now more than 6 years have elapsed but the OPs are not in a position to deliver the possession of the plot to the complainant. Now the OPs inspite of developing the colony as per lay out plan issued a letter on 12.10.2015 regarding intimation of possession and demanded Rs.7,45,459.38/- and the OPs have further issued reminder for intimation of possession vide letter dated 27.05.2016. The OPs are liable to pay interest @ 18 % per annum on the amount deposited by the complainant at the time of allotment of the plot. The complainant got served legal notice upon the OPs but to no avail.

2.                     We have heard the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the complainant besides going through the material available on the file.

3.                     After going through the allotment letter dated 27.12.2011, it is clear that the price of the plot in question is shown as Rs.20,65,200/-, therefore, before going further it is desirable to re-produce Section -11 of the Consumer Protection Act, which is as under:-

“11 Jurisdiction of the District Forum (1) Subject to the other provisions of this Act, the District Forum shall have jurisdiction to entertain complaints where the value of the goods or services and the compensation, if any, claimed does not exceed rupees twenty lakhs”.

Section-11 is worded in clear terms and leaves no one in doubt that the District Forum shall not entertain any complaint which exceeds its pecuniary limits beyond Rs.20.00 lacs. On this point we may place reliance of judgment dated 07.03.2017 passed by Hon’ble State Commission, Chandigarh in case titled as Manmohan Singh Vs. Unitech etc. wherein it has been held that if the sale consideration agreed to be paid by the consumer is taken as the value of the goods or services in that case, the amount of compensation as claimed in the complaint needs to be added to the agreed consideration and the aggregate of the consideration and the compensation claimed in the complaint would determine the pecuniary jurisdiction of the Consumer Forum.

4.                     In view of the legal proposition enunciated above, we refrain ourselves from giving any opinion whether complainant fall within the purview of consumer or whether any deficiency on the part of Ops but we decide the point of pecuniary jurisdiction first in light of the case laws referred above. Accordingly, we are of the confirmed opinion that this Forum lacks pecuniary jurisdiction to try the present complaint. As such, we have no option except to dismiss the present complaint for lack of pecuniary jurisdiction and thus the same is hereby dismissed in limnie with no order as to costs with a liberty to the complainant to approach appropriate Court/Forum/Commission on the same cause of action.  Exemption of time spent before this Forum is granted  in terms of the  judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case titled “ Laxmi Engineering Works versus PSG Industrial Institute  (1995) 3 SCC page 583. Copies of this order be sent to the parties concerned free of costs, as per rules. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance. 

ANNOUNCED: 27.11.2017                                            (D.N.ARORA)

                                                                                              PRESIDENT               

 

 

        (PUSHPENDER KUMAR)  

                                                                                               MEMBER      

                                   

 

                                                             (ANAMIKA GUPTA)                                                                                                                                                                                                          MEMBER