Complaints Filed on:17.02.2014 &
21.02.2014 |
Disposed On:26.12.2015 |
BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM AT BANGALORE URBAN
26th DAY OF DECEMBER 2015
PRESENT:- | SRI. P.V SINGRI | PRESIDENT |
| SMT. M. YASHODHAMMA | MEMBER |
COMPLAINT No.320/2014, 350/2014 & 354/2014. |
COMPLAINT No.320/2014 COMPLAINANT | Sri.N. Narahari, S/o Late N.Narasaiah, Aged about 38 years, R/a No.1/344-8, Pulivendula, Kadapa District, Andra Pradesh. Represented by authorized person Sri.C.Ramanjaneyula Reddy, R/at No.1/286, Ankalammapet, Pulivendula, Kadapa District, Andhrapradesh. |
COMPLAINT No.350/2014 COMPLAINANT | Sri.Kailasaiah G.P, S/o Prasadaiah, Aged about 67 years, R/a No.13, Sy. No.56/8, 9th Block, Sri. M.V Layout, Jnanbharathi Post, Mallathalli, Bangalore-056. |
COMPLAINT No.354/2014 COMPLAINANT | Sri.C.Ramanjaneyula Reddy, S/o C. Narayana Reddy, R/at No.1/286, Ankalammapet, Pulivendula, Kadapa District, Andhrapradesh. Advocate – Sri.Ramesha M.N V/s. |
OPPOSITE PARTIES | 1) M/s Presidency Elite & M/s. My County, Registered office at No.895/1, “SKANDA”14th Cross, Mahalakshmi Layout, Bangalore-086, Represented by its Director, Bhaskar Reddy. 2) Sri. Bhaskar Reddy, S/o Bala Venkata Reddy, Aged about 48 years, R/at No.1, Srikrishna Avenue, “SHRESTHA”, Doddakallasandra, Near Macualoy Slcod, Kanakapura Road, Bangalore. 3) Sri.T Ripunjaya Reddy, S/o Raghava Reddy, Aged about .. years, R/a 604, Vaishnavi Pradise, Sangam Circle, Jayanagar, Bangalore-011. |
O R D E R
SRI. P.V SINGRI, PRESIDENT
All these complaints have been filed by different complainants against one and the same OPs with similar relief. Issues involved in all these complaints are one and the same. Therefore, all these complaints have been taken up together for disposal under this common order.
2. The complainants have filed these complaints U/s.12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the Opposite Parties (herein after referred as OPs) claiming refund of the advance amount paid by each of them towards purchase of sites together with interest, compensation and cost of the litigation.
3. The brief averments made in the complaints are as under:
The OPs are engaged in the development of land and formation of residential layouts. OPs.2 & 3 are the Managing Directors. The OPs advertised in the news papers, magazine and distributed hand bills regarding formation of residential layouts called as “Presidency Elite” at Doddamarahalli, Yelluvahally, Varamallenahalli, Nandi Hobli, Chikkaballapura Taluk and District / “My County” at Chikka Hullur Village, Kasaba Hobli, Hosakote Taluk, Bangalore Rural District. The complainants were lured by the OPs to purchase the sites to be formed in the said layouts. Believing that the OPs would form the layout within stipulated period and handover the possession of sites immediately after registration agreed to purchase the sites in the “Presidency Elite / My County layouts.
Sl
No. | Complaint No. | Project Name | Total consideration amount | Advance amount paid | Date of agreement of sale | Legal
notice date |
1) | 320/2014 | Presidency Elite | Rs.12,00,000/- | Rs.4,00,000/- | 14.09.2007 | 05.11.2013 |
2) | 350/2014 | My County | Rs.6,75,000/- | Rs.2,25,000/- | 24.11.2006 | 21.01.2014 |
3) | 354/2014 | Presidency Elite | Rs.6,00,000/- | Rs.2,00,000/- | 14.09.2007 | 05.11.2013 |
The complainants have paid advance amount as mentioned above through cheques/cash and OPs having received said advance amount executed agreement of sale in favour of each party on the dates mentioned above. The OPs promised and assured that they will execute the sale deed in respect of the said sites by receiving balance amount within the stipulated period. Further they failed to form the residential layout as promised by them and also failed to execute the sale deed. The complainant was convinced that the OPs by making false promises collected advance amount with a sole intention to cheat them. Therefore, the complainants demanded OPs to refund the advance amount.
The OPs neither refunded advance amount nor formed the layout. The OPs protracting the refund of the amount on one or the other ground. Therefore, the complainants got issued a legal notice demanding refund of the advance amount. However, the OPs failed to refund the advance amount. Therefore, the complainants were compelled to approach this Forum with a prayer to direct the OPs to refund him advance amount paid together with interest & compensation for deficiency in service together with litigation cost.
4. After admitting the complaints, registered notices were sent to the OPs. However, the same were returned with an endorsement as “addressee left”. Thereafter, the complainants got published the notice of the complaint in the local news paper. Despite publication of the complaint notice, OPs failed to appear and contest the complaints.
5. Thereafter, the complainants were called upon to file the affidavit evidence. Accordingly, the complainants filed their affidavit evidence in lieu of oral evidence. Written arguments were also submitted. The allegation made in the complaints as well as the sworn testimony of the complainants stands unchallenged. We don’t have reasons to disbelieve the sworn testimony of the complainants in which they have reiterated the allegations made in the complaints.
6. Perused the allegations made in the complaint, the sworn testimony of the complainants, copies of agreements of sale, receipts and other materials placed on record.
7. As already stated above, the OPs for the reasons best known to them despite publication of notice of the complaint in the local newspaper failed to appear before the Forum and contest the claim of the complainants. The copy of the agreement of sale and the receipts produced by each of the complainants confirms the payment of advance amount by each one of the complainants as stated in their complaint. It is apparent from the material placed on record that the OPs having executed the agreement of sale by receiving the advance amount as mentioned in each of the agreement of sale, failed to execute registered sale deed in respect of the sites as mentioned in the agreements of sale in favour of the complainants without there being any valid cause.
8. Though each of the complainants were ready to pay the balance amount on the date of execution of sale deeds but the OPs did not come forward to execute the sale deed in terms of the agreement of sale. It appears that the OPs did not form the layout at all as promised by them. It appears that the OPs have purchased certain lands but failed to get the same converted for purpose of laying residential layout. From the conduct of complainants, it appears that they received the advance amount with an oblique motive of cheating the complainants even much before purchase of the land. The OPs have collected huge advance amount from each one of the complainants promising them their dream sites at an early date. However, the OPs cheated the complainants and failed to form any residential layout. The OPs having failed to form the layout and execute the registered sale deed in favour of the complainants ought to have refunded the advance amount collected from each of the complainants. The conduct of the OP amounts to grave deficiency in service and also amounts to unfair trade practice. It is apparent from the conduct of the OPs that they collected huge advance amount from each of the complainants with an oblique motive of cheating them. Therefore, the said act of OPs also amounts to cheating punishable U/s.420 of Indian Penal Code.
9. We do not have reasons to disbelieve the sworn testimony of the complainants coupled with the documents such as agreement of sale, receipts etc., produced by the complainants. For the discussions made above, we are of the opinion that the OPs have to be directed to refund the advance amount received from each one of the complainants together with interest @ 18% p.a. The conduct of OPs must have caused mental agony, harassment and lot of inconvenience to each of the complainants. Therefore, the OPs have to be directed to pay compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- towards deficiency in service on their part together with litigation cost of Rs.3,000/-.
10. The order could not be passed within the stipulated time due to heavy pendency.
11. In the result, we proceed to pass the following:
O R D E R
The complaints filed by the complainants U/s.12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 are allowed in part.
The OPs in complaint No.320/2014 are directed to refund advance amount of Rs.4,00,000/- to the complainant together with interest @ 18% p.a from the date of receipt till the date of realization.
The OPs in complaint No.350/2014 are directed to refund advance amount of Rs.2,25,000/- to the complainant together with interest @ 18% p.a from the date of receipt till the date of realization.
The OPs in complaint No.354/2014 are directed to refund advance amount of Rs.2,00,000/- to the complainant together with interest @ 18% p.a from the date of receipt till the date of realization.
The OPs shall pay compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- to each of the complainants together with litigation cost of Rs.3,000/-.
The OPs shall comply the order passed by this Forum within eight weeks from today.
Send the copy of the order to both the parties free of costs.
This original order shall be kept in the file of the complaint No.320/2014 and a copy of it shall be placed in other connected files.
(Dictated to the Stenographer, got it transcribed and corrected, pronounced in the Forum on this 26th day of December 2015)
MEMBER PRESIDENT
Vln*
COMPLAINT No.320/2014, 350/2014 & 354/2014. |
COMPLAINT No.320/2014 COMPLAINANT | Sri.N. Narahari, Andra Pradesh. Represented by authorized person Sri.C.Ramanjaneyula Reddy, Andhrapradesh. |
COMPLAINT No.350/2014 COMPLAINANT | Sri.Kailasaiah G.P, Bangalore-056. |
COMPLAINT No.354/2014 COMPLAINANT | Sri.C.Ramanjaneyula Reddy, Andhrapradesh. |
| V/s. |
OPPOSITE PARTIES | 1) M/s Presidency Elite & M/s. My County, Bangalore-086, Represented by its Director, Bhaskar Reddy. 2) Sri. Bhaskar Reddy, Bangalore. 3) Sri.T Ripunjaya Reddy, Bangalore-011. |
Witnesses examined on behalf of the complainant/s dated 26.09.2014.
1) | Sri.C.Ramajaneyula Reddy (Complaint No.320/2014) |
2) | Sri.Kailasaiah Prasadiah (Complaint No.350/2014) |
3) | Sri.C.Ramajaneyula Reddy (Complaint No.354/2014) |
Documents produced by the complainant:
(Complaint No.320/2014)
1) | Document No.1 is the copy of receipt issued by OP to complainant dated 14.09.2007 for Rs.4,00,000/-. |
2) | Document No.2 is the copy of agreement of sale between OP and complainant dated 14.09.2007. |
3) | Document No.3 is the copy of legal notice dated 05.11.2013. |
4) | Document No.4 is the returned postal covers. (3) |
5) | Document No.5 is the news paper dated 29.06.2014. |
Documents produced by the complainant:
(Complaint No.350/2014)
1) | Document No.1 is the copy of receipts issued by OP to complainant dated 11.11.2006 for Rs.1,25,000/- and Rs.1,00,000/- respectively. |
2) | Document No.2 is the copy of agreement of sale between OP and complainant dated 24.11.2006. |
3) | Document No.3 is the copy of legal notice dated 21.01.2014. |
4) | Document No.4 is the returned postal covers. (3) |
5) | Document No.5 is the news paper dated 25.07.2014. |
Documents produced by the complainant:
(Complaint No.354/2014)
1) | Document No.1 is the copy of agreement of sale between OP and complainant dated 14.09.2007. |
2) | Document No.2 is the copy of legal notice dated 05.11.2013. |
3) | Document No.3 is the returned postal covers. (3) |
4) | Document No.4 is the news paper dated 25.07.2014. |
OPs - Absent
MEMBER PRESIDENT
Vln*
