BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, AMRITSAR.

Consumer Complaint No.196/14

Date of Institution:04/04/2014

Date of Decision:06/02/2015  

Jagdish Kumar son of late Sh.Ram Lal, R/O 100, Prem Nagar, P.O: Vijay Nagar, Amritsar. 

Complainant

Versus

1. M/s.Nature Heights Infra Limited, having its Local Branch Office at 10, Deep Complex, Basement, Opp.Doaba Autos, A.G.Tower, Court Road, Amritsar through its Local Branch Manager/ Person Overall Incharge.
2. M/s.Nature Heights Infra Limited, 9, Sunder Nagri, Hanumangarh Road, Abohar, District Fazilka through its Chairman/ Director/ Overall Incharge.

 Opposite Parties

Complaint under section 11 and 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

Present: For the Complainant: Sh.S.K.Devessar, Advocate

              For the Opposite Parties No.1 and 2: Sh.Anil Sharma, Advocate.

Quorum:

Sh.Bhupinder Singh, President

Ms.Kulwant Kaur Bajwa, Member      

Order dictated by:

Sh.Bhupinder Singh, President.

1. Present complaint has been filed by Jagdish Kumar under the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act alleging therein that he agreed to purchase plot of 1000 square feet from Opposite Parties having its Head Office at 9, Sunder Nagri Hanumangarh Road, Abohar, District Fazilka and having its local Branch Office at 10 Deep Complex, Basement, Opposite Doaba Autos, A.G.Tower, Court Road, Amritsar. Complainant alleges that in order to reduce the terms regarding allotment of plot, an agreement to sell dated 28.7.2012 having plot reference ID No.10036694 was reduced  into writing. All the documents regarding allotment of plot in question were submitted to the Opposite Parties having its local office at Amritsar and even the first installment of Rs.87500/- was paid in July 2012 vide cheque No.840433 dated 5.7.2012 drawn on Punjab National Bank, Green Avenue, Amritsar to the Opposite Parties at Amritsar where the Opposite Parties have its Local Branch Office and even  the papers regarding refund of amount in question were submitted to the Opposite Parties in their Branch Office at Amritsar and even the receipt regarding receiving the necessary documents, affidavits etc was issued by the Local Branch Office of Opposite Party at Amritsar. As the complainant agreed to purchase the plot from Opposite Party for a valuable consideration and Opposite Parties agreed to allot plot to the complainant and also to adhere to the term and conditions settled between parties by way of rendering service also and as such the complainant is a consumer under the Act. The complainant agreed to pay the total amount of Rs.525000/- in  6 equal annual installments  and the possession was to be delivered by the Opposite Parties after having received full amount of installments. It is important to mention that even one of the terms and conditions of the agreement was that if the purchaser himself does not want to get the sale deed registered willingly, even in that condition, Opposite Parties were under obligation to refund the amount  alongwith 16% per annum growth and so much so though both the parties agreed to remain by the terms and conditions. The complainant paid the amount of installment in order to perform his part, but on account of  some unavoidable and compelling circumstances, the complainant was not interested to get the plot by way of registration of sale deed and as such, the complainant exercised his option to get back the amount deposited by him by way of installment as per the terms and conditions settled between the parties. Complainant further alleges that in order to get back the amount by way of refund, the complainant submitted Original agreement for sale, duly sworn affidavit for refund, original booking letter dated 7.8.2012 in the office of Opposite Parties at Amritsar, but the Opposite Parties failed to refund the amount and inspite of various requests and reminders and as such, even the complainant wrote a letter on 28.1.2014 which was duly sent to the Opposite Parties through registered cover with a request to refund the amount. Alleging the same to be deficiency in service, complaint was filed seeking directions to the opposite parties to pay Rs.87500/- by way of refund of amount alongwith growth rate of 16% annually to the complainant. Compensation and litigation expenses were also demanded.
2. On notice, Opposite Parties appeared and filed written version in which it was submitted that the present complaint is bad for want of jurisdiction. The agreement to sell was executed at Abohar, property in question does not falls within the jurisdiction of this Forum and both the parties to the agreement mutually agreed in event of any dispute it will be subject to jurisdiction of Abohar courts. It is further submitted that as per the terms and conditions of the agreement of sale executed between the parties, the payment is to be made in six equal annual installments and the possession was to be delivered by the Opposite Parties after having received full amount of installments, but the complainant showed his unwillingness to perform his part of the contract and refused to deposit the remaining installments due towards him. The complainant is guilty of wrongful act and conduct as well as wrong interpretation on his part with regard to clause which has been reproduced by the complainant.  The correct interpretation of the agreement is that on completion of sale price, the vendor would execute sale deed in favour of the purchaser only after passing of three month’s period to enable to the company to scrutinize the entire  account. The complainant has not deposited the remaining installments standing  due against him and failed to perform his part of the contract and this fact has  been duly admitted by him. The option of getting back the amount will be available only after deposit of entire installments as agreed upon and prior to execution of sale deed. While denying and controverting other allegations, dismissal of complaint was prayed.
3. Complainant tendered into evidence his affidavit Ex.C1 alongwith documents Ex.C2 to Ex.C19 and closed the evidence on behalf of the complainant.
4. Opposite Parties tendered into evidence affidavit of Sh.Atul Sharma Ex.OP1 alongwith documents Ex.OP2  to Ex.OP5 and closed the evidence on behalf of the Opposite Parties.
5. We have carefully gone through the pleadings of the parties; arguments advanced by the ld.counsel for the parties and have appreciated the evidence produced on record by both the parties with the valuable assistance of the ld.counsel for both the parties.
6. From the record i.e. pleadings of the parties and the evidence produced on record by the parties, it is clear that the complainant  purchased  plot 1000 square feet from Opposite Parties at Abohar and the Opposite Parties executed agreement of sale in favour of the complainant Ex.C2 dated 28.7.2012 which was duly signed by both the parties in the presence of witnesses Harpreet Kaur of Bathinda and Raghav Khanna  of Amritsar. This agreement was executed at Abohar, Tehsil: Abohar, District Fazilka. Said plot was having reference ID No.10036694. The total value of the plot was Rs.525000/- which was payable in six equal annual installments. The complainant paid first installment of Rs.87500/- Ex.C3 in August, 2012 to the Opposite Parties vide cheque No.840433 dated 5.7.2012. Later on, the complainant changed his mind due to some unavoidable and compelling circumstances and he submitted plot surrender form Ex.C4 dated 16.7.2013 to the Opposite Parties which was duly received by the Opposite Parties, but the Opposite Parties did not refund the amount of Rs.87500/- to the complainant despite the fact that Opposite Parties in the terms and conditions of the agreement has mentioned that if the purchaser does not want to get the sale deed registered willingly, even in that condition, Opposite Parties were under obligation to refund the amount  alongwith 16% per annum growth. Ld.counsel for the complainant submitted that all this amounts to deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties.
7. Whereas the case of the Opposite Parties is that the complainant applied for plot at Abohar. He also executed agreement of sale with the Opposite Parties regarding this plot Ex.C2 at Abohar and in that agreement, it has been decided voluntarily by both the parties that in the event of  any dispute or  difference between the parties, the matter shall be subject to Abohar jurisdiction only. So, this Forum has no territorial jurisdiction to try and decide the present complaint. Opposite Parties further alleged that by aforesaid agreement, both the parties had agreed that on completion of sale price, the vendor would execute sale deed in favour of the purchaser only after passing of three month’s period to enable to the company to scrutinize the entire  account. So, the complainant can get the amount refund only on payment of entire sale price. As such, the Opposite Parties were not liable to refund the amount at this stage to the complainant before completion of the entire sale price of the plot in question. Ld.counsel for the opposite parties, therefore, submitted that there is no deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties.
8. From the entire above discussion, we have come to the conclusion that the complainant applied for plot of 1000 square feet to the Opposite Parties at Abohar. Said plot is also situated at Abohar. The parties have executed agreement of sale voluntarily on 28.7.2012 Ex.C2 in this regard, in which all the terms and conditions of the allotment have been mentioned.   The complainant was given plot reference ID No.10036674. This agreement of sale was also executed at Abohar, Tehil: Abohar, District Fazilka on 28.7.2012. The amount of payment of first installment of Rs. 87500/- was also made by the complainant through cheque to the Opposite Parties at Abohar. So, all this fully proves that the cause of action accrued to the complainant at Abohar, where  property i.e. subject matter of dispute is situated. The Opposite Parties have also its administrative/ main office at Abohar. No doubt, the Opposite Parties have branch office at Amritsar, but it has been voluntarily agreed by the parties  vide agreement Ex.C2 that in case of any dispute or difference between the parties, the same shall be subject to  Abohar jurisdiction only. So, both the parties have voluntarily agreed to solve the dispute or difference with regard to plot in question at Abohar only. It has been held by Hon’ble Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi in complaint No.C-273/10 decided on 18.1.2011 that where parties agreed for settlement of any dispute regarding house/ plot in question in Agra courts, then the matter should be decided by that court only and Delhi courts can not decide the matter. It has been held by Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in case Sonic Surgical Vs. National Insurance Company Limited IV(2009) CPJ 40 (SC) that where fire broke out in godown at Ambala- Insurance policy taken at Ambala-Compensation claim made at Ambala- Contention regarding applicability of Amendment Act, 2003 not acceptable. Branch Office in amended section means, branch office where cause of action arose. So Consumer Commission, Chandigarh has no jurisdiction to adjudicate the matter. Ld.counsel for the complainant submitted that the complainant submitted  plot surrender form in the Branch Office of Opposite Parties at Amritsar, the Opposite Parties have Branch Office at Amritsar, so this Forum  has jurisdiction to try and decide the present complaint at Amritsar, is not tenable because in view of the ruling of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in case  Sonic Surgical Vs. National Insurance Company Limited (supra), Branch Office means where cause of action arose. Here in this case, the plot is situated at Abohar, the complainant has applied for plot in question to the Opposite Parties at Abohar. Not only this, the complainant has also executed agreement of sale Ex.C2 at Abohar in which the complainant has agreed in writing that in case of any dispute/ difference between the parties,  the same shall be subject to  Abohar jurisdiction only which falls within the territorial jurisdiction of District Consumer Forum, Ferozepur. So, this Forum at Amritsar has no territorial jurisdiction to try and decide the present  complaint.
9. Resultantly, this complaint be returned to the complainant and the complainant shall be at liberty to file this complaint at appropriate court/ Forum having territorial jurisdiction. Keeping in view the peculiar circumstances of the case, the parties are left to bear their own cost.     Copies of the order be furnished to the parties free of costs. File is ordered to be consigned to the record room. Case could not be disposed of within the stipulated period due to heavy pendency of the cases in this Forum.

Dated: 06/02/2015.                                                (Bhupinder Singh)                                                                                                  President

hrg                                                                  (Kulwant Kaur Bajwa)

                                        Member