Final Order / Judgement | Complaint filed on:02.05.2023 | Disposed on:31.08.2023 |
BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION AT BANGALORE (URBAN) DATED 31ST DAY OF AUGUST 2023 PRESENT:- SMT.M.SHOBHA B.Sc., LL.B. | : | PRESIDENT | | | | SMT.SUMA ANIL KUMAR BA, LL.B., IWIL-IIMB | : | MEMBER | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
COMPLAINANT | | Mr.R.Ravi Kumar, Aged about 44 years, R/at No.168, 1st Main, -
Annapoorneshwari Nagar, Bangalore 560 091. | | | (SRI.D.Nagaraja Reddy, Advocate) | | OPPOSITE PARTY | 1 | Vsan Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., Rep. by Shyam Sundar M., Manager, No.11 & 12, PS Plaza, Jawaharala Street, Platform Road, Sheshadripuram, Bangalore 560 020. | | | (Sri.R.Hari Prasad, Advocate) |
ORDER SMT.M.SHOBHA, PRESIDENT - The complaint has been filed under Section 35 of C.P.Act (hereinafter referred as an Act) against the OP for the following reliefs against the OP:-
(a) Direct the OP to pay a sum of Rs.5,08,000/- along with interest at 18% p.m., from the date of respective payment till realisation. (b) Direct the OP to pay compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- towards harassment and mental agony to the complainant with interest. (c) To grant such other reliefs. - The case set up by the complainant in brief is as under:-
The OP is the promoters and developers of residential layouts consisting of sites of various dimensions situated at Mallinathapura Village, Kempanahalli Village, Bolanahalli Village of Bilikere Hobli, Hunsur Taluk, Mysore District, under the name and style of M/s Vsan Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., the complainant become the member of the said project floated as san city Kaveri. The complainant opted to purchase a site No.300F, measuring 30X40 feet, formed in the above said schedule property. 3. As per the assurance complainant has paid a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- on 09.02.2015 as down payment. Out of the said amount further agreed to pay the remaining amount of Rs.4,08,000/- under 40 monthly installments as Rs.10,000/- each and Rs.8,800/- with the last EMI. Accordingly MOU dated 20.02.2015 was entered between the parties. The OP has agreed to complete the sale transaction within 24 months from the date of MOU dated 20.02.2015. - After entering into MOU dated 20.02.2015 the OP has sent a letter dated 06.08.2015 intimating the development activity for the project to the first party that it has obtained DC conversion for Kaveri project as per order No.ALN(2) CR70/2014-15 dated 27.04.2015. As per the order of the DC the survey number mentioned in the said order is not at all connected with the Sy.No., given in the MOU entered into with the first party.
- After receipt of the full sale consideration, has unnecessarily started delaying to complete the sale transaction by giving untenable reasons without giving a proper feed back to the complainant. The OP has ignored the complainant when the complainant tried to contact the OP on several times. The OP has neither started the project and complete the project and not informed about the progress of the work and put the complainant in an awkward situation.
- After waited for more than a year the Ops have called for a meeting and in the meeting the OP has convinced this complainant that they have agreed to allot the different site i.e., site NO.36 in the alternative to site No.300F mentioned in the MOU and accordingly allotment letter dated 22.02.2020 was issued, agreed to execute the transaction within 5 months from the date of allotment letter.
- The complainant has lost faith on the OP because of their fault. After that the complainant has exhausted all options to settle the matter but the request made by the complainant was not at all accepted by the OP. The OP on one or the other pretext went on postponing to complete the project and sale transaction. At last the complainant has got issued legal notice on 04.03.2023. Inspite of service of notice the OP has neither issued any reply nor complied the request of the complainant. This complainant is always ready and willing to get the schedule property registered his name and he is ready to bear the registration expenses. But the OP failed to complete the sale transaction as per their promise. Hence the complainant has filed this complaint.
- In response to the notice, OP appears and files version. The OP has admitted all the allegations made in the complaint relating to the membership of the complainant and the sale consideration amount paid by him and also the MOU entered between them.
- It is the specific contention taken by the OP that he was supposed to register the sale deed in favour of the complainant within two years from the date of execution of the said MOU. Even though he has applied for conversion of land before concerned government authorities in November 2016 the conversion order was passed by the authorities in 2018. In view of the demonetization in the month of November 2016 the whole nation suffered heavily in terms of finance and the OP has also suffered finance problem due to sudden changes in monitory policies. It even halted his various project developments.
- After obtaining the approvals from the concerned government authorities as per the new law of the government OP was compelled to register this project under RERA and was then permitted to register the plot to his customers. In compliance of the same this OP was not able to get register the schedule A and B sites to the complainant as per the MOU. This OP has also offered the complainant an exchange site in another project which was ready for registration the complainant not only disagreed to the same but even filed this petition before this commission to exploit the helplessness situation of the OP at that time.
- It is further case of the OP that he is ready to provide alternative site to the complainant for registration towards the executed MOU with the consent of the complainant provided she pays the deficit amount towards the existing price of the alternative site. This OP is ready to get the plot register within six months from the date of consent from the complainant. Due to outbreak of the covid-19 this OP is not in a situation to refund the amount paid by the complainant since the economic condition of the OP is as bad as the economic condition of the nation. Hence OP prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
- The complainant has filed his affidavit evidence and relies on 33 documents. Though sufficient time was given to OP to adduce their evidence, they have not appeared before this commission and not filed any affidavit evidence or documents.
- Heard the arguments of advocate for the complainant only.
- The following points arise for our consideration as are:-
- Whether the complainant proves deficiency of service on the part of OP?
- Whether the complainant is entitled to relief mentioned in the complaint?
- What order?
- Our answers to the above points are as under:
Point No.1: Affirmative Point No.2: Affirmative in part Point No.3: As per final orders REASONS - Point No.1 AND 2: These two points are inter related and hence they have taken for common discussion. We have perused the allegations made in the complaint, version, affidavit evidence of complainant and documents 01 to 33.
- It is undisputed fact that the complainant become the member of the project floated as San City Kaveri and he opted to purchase the schedule property bearing No. 300F, for Rs.5,08,000/- and paid the entire sale consideration amount on different dates and entered into MOU as per Ex.P1.
- Complainant has paid Rs.5,08,000/- in respect of schedule property as Ex.P2 to P27. The complainant has paid the entire consideration amount.
- After receipt of the full sale consideration, the OP has started ignoring the complainant and he has neither started to complete the project nor informed the progress of work to the complainant. The complainant has given a letter dated 17.12.2019 requesting the OP to return the amount was paid by him as he is dis-satisfied with the work of the OP. after that the OP held a meeting and he convinced the complainant to agree for different site i.e., site No.36 as that of the property in the agreement i.e., site NO.300F and accordingly an allotment letter dated 22.02.2020 was issued agreeing to complete the transaction within five months from the date of allotment letter.
- When the OP failed to respond to the complainant he was decided to cancel the MOU and requested the OP to refund of the amount. He has also got issued legal notice as Ex.P31 and the same was served on the OP.
- On the other hand, the contention taken by the OP is that he was unable to complete the project and to register the sale deed in favour of the complainant as agreed by him within five months from the date of allotment letter since there was a delay in obtaining the conversion order and also he has suffered heavily in terms of finance due to demonetization and as per the new law he was compel to register the project under the RERA. In compliance of the same he was not able to get the plot registered in the name of the complainant as per the MOU. Even now he is ready to provide alternative site to the complainant within six months after obtaining the consent of the complainant. If the complainant is ready to pay the deficit amount towards the existing price of the alternative site, but the complainant was not agreed to get the alternative site proposed by the OP.
- When the complainant has paid the entire amount during 19.05.2018 and has waited till 2023 as per the MOU and allotment letter the OP has neither started the project nor got registered the schedule plots in the name of the complainant. He was not available for the complainant when the complainant has made several attempts to contact the OP. The OP would have informed the complainant about his problems and requested the complainant for granting time to complete the project. Instead of informing the complainant the OP made himself not available to the complainant. In view of this the complainant has to approach this Commission for refund of the amount from the OP.
- The complainant cannot accept the proposal for alternative site made by the OP as she was not satisfied. The OP cannot force the complainant to accept his proposal without refunding the amount. The complainant also cannot wait for an uncertain period for getting the schedule plots/sites registered in his name when the project itself is not at all started by the OP as assured by them. It is the duty of the OP to get all the approvals before calling for the public to purchase the site. Instead of that the OP has collected the money from the proposed purchasers and he has not started the project by taking untenable reasons. When the OP has not completed the project and get the schedule plots registered in the name of the complainant after obtaining entire sale consideration amount, amounts to deficiency of service and negligence and unfair trade practice. Hence the complainant is entitled for the relief. Hence we answer point No.1 in affirmative and point No.2 partly in affirmative.
- Point No.3:- In view the discussion referred above the complaint is liable to be allowed in part. OP is liable to refund Rs.5,08,000/- along with interest at 10% p.a., from respective payment to till the date of realization. OP is further liable to pay Rs.1,00,000/- towards compensation with litigation expenses of Rs.10,000/- to the complainant. We proceed to pass the following;
O R D E R - The complaint is allowed in part.
- OP is directed to pay Rs.5,08,000/- with interest at 10% p.a., from the date of respective payment to till the date of realization.
- OP is further directed to pay Rs.1,00,000/- towards compensation along with litigation cost of Rs.10,000/- to the complainant.
- The OP shall comply this order within 60 days from this date, failing which the OP shall pay interest at 12% p.a. after expiry of 60 days on Rs.5,08000/- till final payment.
- Furnish the copy of this order and return the extra pleadings and documents to the parties.
(Dictated to the Stenographer, got it transcribed and corrected, pronounced in the Open Commission on this 31ST day of AUGUST, 2023) (SUMA ANIL KUMAR) MEMBER | (M.SHOBHA) PRESIDENT |
Documents produced by the Complainant-P.W.1 are as follows: 1. | Ex.P.1 | Copy of MOU | 2. | Ex.P.2 to 27 | Copy of the receipts | 3. | Ex.P.28 | Copy of the intimation on DC conversion for Kaveri project | 4. | Ex.P.29 | Copy of the letter dated 17.12.2018 | 5. | Ex.P.30 | Copy of the allotment letter | 6. | Ex.P.31 | Copy of legal notice dated 04.03.2023 | 7. | Ex.P.32 | Postal receipt | 8. | Ex.P.33 | Postal acknowledgement |
Documents produced by the representative of opposite party – R.W.1; NIL (SUMA ANIL KUMAR) MEMBER | (M.SHOBHA) PRESIDENT |
| |