Chandigarh

DF-II

CC/113/2021

S.K. Verma - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s YPS Developers Pvt. Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

S.K Verma adv

23 Feb 2022

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION-II

U.T. CHANDIGARH

 

Consumer Complaint No.	:	113/2021
Date of Institution	:	16.02.2021
Date of Decision	:	23.02.2022

 

                     

            

 

S.K.Verma s/ o Mr.Mahendra Pal Verma r/o 3002, SBI Officers Society, Sector 49-D, Chandigarh-160047.

 

….Complainant

 

Versus

 

1. .   M/s YPS DEVELOPERS (P) LTD.

 

1. : Registered Address

  B-101, SOMVIHAR,

  R. K. Puram

  New Delhi 1 10022.

 

    Also at

    b.: Site Office,

YPS Developers (p) Ltd. Dwarika,

Madhuban Bapudham, Govind Puram,

Ghaziabad 201013.

 

    c.: Through its Directors Mr. Yag Pal Singh &

Prince Chaudhary, P-1, Sanjay Nagar,

Ghaziabad 201002.

 

2.  Mr. Yag Pal Singh son of Sh. Jagveer Singh, residents of: P-1, Sanjay Nagar, Ghaziabad — 201002.

 

3.  Mr. Prince Chaudhary son of Mr. Yag Pal Singh residents of: P-1, Sanjay Nagar, Ghaziabad 201000

 

4.  Mr.Lalit Bindal s/o Sh.G.C.Bindal r/o 14/84, Rajnagar, Ghaziabad-201002.

 

…. Opposite Parties

BEFORE:
	SMT.PRITI MALHOTRA,	PRESIDING MEMBER
	SHRI B.M.SHARMA	MEMBER
Argued by:-
	Sh.S.K.Verma, Adv. for the complainant None for OPs No.1 and 4 OPs No.2 and 3 exparte.

   

 

PER PRITI MALHOTRA, PRESIDING MEMBER

1.     Briefly stated, the facts of case as alleged by the complainant are that being convinced by the project and its features as explained, offer given and the assurances made by OP No.4 and especially the assured return and personal guarantee given by OP No.4, he booked the flat No.A1606 Tower A (at 16^th Floor) in the project of OP No.1 known as ‘Dwarika’ in Madhuban Bapudham vide application (Annexure C-2) by paying a sum of Rs.2.50 lakhs vide cheque dated 27.03.2014.  Thereafter, he deposited a sum of Rs.10,50,000/- vide cheque dated 27.05.2014 and Rs.41,984/- vide cheque dated 03.06.2014.  Subsequently an agreement dated 25.07.2014 (Annexure c-4) was signed between the complainant and OP No.1 and as per which the possession of the flat was to be delivered within 42 months.  However, even after completion of two years, the project was not started contrary to the assurances made and hence there was bleak chances of the success of the said project and, therefore, he approached the OPs for refund of the deposited amount along with the guaranteed return as per the assurances made. Consequently, OP No.2 on behalf of OP No.1 issued two postdated cheques both dated 18.08.2016 in the sum of Rs.13,41,984/- lakhs as principal amount and Rs.7,59,394/- as guaranteed return. It has further been averred that OP No.4, on the assurances of getting new cheques in favour of the complainant, got the earlier cheques from him in the presence of Mr.Veer Singh and Mr.Naveen Bindal, Advocates but he failed to get the new cheques issued.

         It has further been averred that since the payment was delayed for a longer period expected as assured, thereupon OP No.4 made a proposal to get a piece of land out of 52000 sq. yards belonging to OP No.1 as the high rise project was rejected by the concerned authorities and now OP No.1 is selling the plots in the project site.  He agreed to purchase the piece of land at Rs.18000/- per sq. meters.  In December, 2018, OP No.4 informed the complainant’s husband Mr.S.K.Verma that Mr.Y.P.Singh had accepted the proposal on rates on behalf of OP No.1 company and he would send the layout plan choosing the plots for registry of sale of land. In February, 2019, OP No.4 again made a promise that by 31.03.2019 either the land was to be transferred in the name of the complainant or full payment along with the guaranteed return @ 25% p.a. and yearly compounding on the amount of earlier cheques issued to the complainant till the payment was to be made. As desired, he sent the calculation to OP No.1 Mr.Lalit Bindal through whatsapp on 03.03.2019 stating that total refund comes to Rs.58,16,651/-. Finally, he got served a legal notice dated 09.05.2019 upon OPs No.1, 2 and 4 requiring them either to make full payment with interest or to sell the land @ Rs.18000/- per sq. yards.  OPs No.2 and 3 replied the said notice stating therein that they had paid the entire money to the complainant in cash. Alleging that the aforesaid acts of omission and commission on the part of the OPs amount to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice, the complainant has filed the instant complaint.   

2.     Despite due dasti service, OPs No.2 and 3 failed to put in appearance and as a result thereof they were ordered to be proceeded against exparte vide order dated 28.01.2022.
3.     Defence of the OPs No.1 and 4 was struck off vide order dated 14.02.2022 as they have failed to file the written statement and evidence by way of affidavit despite availing repeated opportunities.
4.     We have heard the Counsel for the complainant and have gone through the documents on record.
5.     The whole evidence placed on record by the complainant corroborates the assertions set out in the present complaint. Ann.C-1 is the copy of the brochure of the OP NO.1-Compnay. Annexure C-2 is the copy of the application vide which the complainant had booked the unit in question with OP No.1-Company. Annexures C-3 (Colly.) are the copies of the bank statement and payment receipts regarding proof of depositing the amount of Rs.13,41,984/- by the complainant through cheques with OP No.1-Company.  Annexure C-4 is the copy of the agreement qua the flat in question. Annexure C-5 (Colly.) is the copy of the cheques both dated 18.08.2016 in the sum of Rs.13,41,984/- and Rs.7,59,394/- favouring the complainant issued by OP No.1-Company and no objection certificate qua the unit in question executed by the complainant on receipt of the aforesaid amounts from the OP-Company.  The complainant has further stated that OP No.4 received the aforesaid cheques in lieu of getting the new cheques issued in his favour from the OP-Company and thereafter, the OPs have neither issued the new cheques nor returned the principal amount and the guaranteed return despite his repeated requests and service of the legal notice upon them. In our considered view, the OPs, who are failed to fulfill their promises/assurances, cannot be allowed to usurp the hard earned money of the complainant on flimsy grounds. 

 

6.       The complainant has duly proved the case by way of corroborative evidence and also filed duly sworn affidavit in support of the allegations set-out in the complaint, which goes unrebutted and unopposed in the absence of the OPs.

7.       It is observed that the OPs did not come forward to contradict the allegations set out in the present complaint despite being duly served, which raises a reasonable presumption that the OPs have failed to render due promised services to the complainant.  

8.       From the above discussion and findings, we are of the opinion that the deficiency in service has been proved on the part of the OPs. Therefore, the present complaint is allowed with direction to the OPs:-

a]   To refund a sum of Rs.13,41,984/- and Rs.7,59,394/- i.e. the amounts of the cheques in question issued in favour of the complainant along with interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of its issuance i.e. 18.08.2016 till its actual realization.

[b]  To pay a sum of Rs.25,000/- as compensation to the complainant on account of mental tension and physical harassment complaint.

[c]  To pay an amount of Rs.10,000/- as litigation expenses.

9.       This order shall be complied with by the OPs within 45 days from the date of receipt of its certified copy, failing which, they shall also be liable to pay interest @ 6% p.a. on the compensation amount mentioned at Sr.No.(b) from the date of this order till its actual payment besides compliance of other directions.

10.     Certified copy of this order be communicated to the parties, free of charge. After compliance file be consigned to record room.

Announced 23/02/2022
	Sd/-
	(PRITI MALHOTRA) PRESIDING MEMBER
	Sd/-
	(B.M.SHARMA) MEMBER