CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM – X
GOVERNMENT OF N.C.T. OF DELHI
Udyog Sadan, C – 22 & 23, Institutional Area
(Behind Qutub Hotel)
New Delhi – 110 016
Case No.139/2013
SH. DHANI RAM SHARMA
S/O SH. MANGE RAM SHARMA
R/O VPO, KHARAK KALAN,
DISTT. BHIWANI, HARYANA
…………. COMPLAINANT
AND
Case No.140/2013
SH. RAVI KUMAR
S/O SH. KANHIYA SINGH
R/O CM-33, GALI RISHI DADA,
MAHIPAL PUR, DELHI
…………. COMPLAINANT
AND
Case No.141/2013
SH. HARI KUMAR SHARMA
S/O SH. RAM SARAN
R/O C-109, PHASE-2,
NEW PALAM VIHAR, GURGAON,
HARYANA
…………. COMPLAINANT
AND
Case No.142/2013
SH. SANDIP KUMAR
S/O SH. SATYA SHARMA
R/O VPO, BALAND, DISTT. ROHTAK,
HARYANA
…………. COMPLAINANT
AND
Case No.143/2013
SH. RAMESH KUMAR
S/O SH. G.N. SINGH
R/O H.NO.827, GALI RISHI DADA,
STREET NO.2, CHOPAL ROAD,
MAHIPAL PUR, DELHI-110037
…………. COMPLAINANT
Vs
M/S ARUN DEV BUILDERS
THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR
CORPORATE OFFICE:-
F-89/11, OKHLA PHASE-I, NEW DELHI
ALSO AT:-
F-1211, CHITRANJAN PARK,
NEW DELHI-110019
…………..RESPONDENT
Date of Order:19.12.2018
O R D E R
A.S. Yadav, President
By this order we shall dispose of the aforesaid complaints as the common question of fact and law is involved. For the sake of reference, facts of case no.139/2013 are detailed.
The case of the complainant is that he booked a residential unit measuring 350 sq. ft. in the upcoming project of OP by the name of Dev City Bhiwadi, Rajasthan and paid a sum of Rs.30,000/-. Thereafter OP issued allotment letter dated 01.09.2009 and thereby allotted unit No.D-72/9, 2nd Floor in the aforesaid project. Thereafter the complainant paid the amount by way of monthly installments and in all paid a sum of Rs.1,42,000/- to OP. The last payment of monthly installment of Rs.2000/- was made in December 2011.
It is further stated that the complainant visited the site of project and was shocked to see that no construction work was going on there. This created a doubt in the mind of the complainant and as such, he stopped making further payment. The complainant asked OP as to why the construction has not started but OP failed to give any justifiable reason. The complainant in February 2012 came to know that the project cannot be completed because of civil dispute regarding the land of the project. Therefore the complainant sought refund of the amount but the amount was not refunded. Terming the action of OP as deficiency in service, the present complaint has been filed whereby the complainant has prayed for refund of the amount of Rs.1,42,000/- alongwith interest @ 24% p.a. and also pay sought compensation and litigation expenses.
OP in reply took the plea that the complainant is not a consumer and this Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain the present complaint as appropriate remedy lies before the Civil Court. This Forum lacks territorial jurisdiction as the property is situated at Bhiwadi, Rajasthan. It is not disputed that the complainant booked a flat in the project of OP and paid a sum of Rs.30,000/- as registration amount on 23.04.2008 and the remaining cost of flat was to be paid in monthly installments of Rs.2000/- each. It is stated that OP constructed A Block and allotted flats to the customers who made payment. It is stated that OP is ready to give possession provided amount is paid by the complainant. It is prayed that the complaint be dismissed.
We have gone through the case file carefully.
The complainant is a consumer as he had made the booking and a flat was allotted to him and he paid the amount.
This Forum has got territorial jurisdiction to entertain the present complaint as entire payment has been made at the corporate office of OP which is within the jurisdiction of this Forum. All receipts were issued from that office.
It is significant to note that the booking was made in April 2008 and the present complaint was filed in March 2013 but till filing of the complaint, OP has failed to prove anything on record that they have obtained requisite permission from the appropriate government. OP have not placed any document on record to show that A Block has been completed and the possession has been given to the allottees.
It is proved from the testimony of the complainant that nothing was done at the spot. The complainant was justified in seeking refund of the amount, however, the amount was not refunded. It is a clear cut case of deficiency in service on the part of OP.
In case No.139/13, OP is directed to refund a sum of Rs.1,42,000/- to the complainant alongwith interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of respective deposit. OP is further directed to pay Rs.10,000/- towards compensation and Rs.5,000/- towards litigation cost.
In case No.140/13, OP is directed to refund a sum of Rs.1,48,000/- to the complainant alongwith interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of respective deposit. OP is further directed to pay Rs.10,000/- towards compensation and Rs.5,000/- towards litigation cost.
In case No.141/13, OP is directed to refund a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- to the complainant alongwith interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of respective deposit. OP is further directed to pay Rs.10,000/- towards compensation and Rs.5,000/- towards litigation cost.
In case No.142/13, OP is directed to refund a sum of Rs.1,30,000/- to the complainant alongwith interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of respective deposit. OP is further directed to pay Rs.10,000/- towards compensation and Rs.5,000/- towards litigation cost.
In case No.143/13, OP is directed to refund a sum of Rs.1,34,000/- to the complainant alongwith interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of respective deposit. OP is further directed to pay Rs.10,000/- towards compensation and Rs.5,000/- towards litigation cost.
Let the order be complied within one month of the receipt thereof. The complaint stands disposed of accordingly.
Copy of order be sent to the parties, free of cost, and thereafter file be consigned to record room.
(RITU GARODIA) (H.C. SURI) (A.S. YADAV)
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
