Delhi

New Delhi

CC/71/2020

Harpreet Kaur - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s. SMV Agencies Pvt.Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

11 Apr 2022

ORDER

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, VI,

DISTT.NEW DELHI, M-BLOCK, VIKAS BHAWAN, NEW DELHI-110002.

 

CC/71/2020

 

IN THE MATTER OF:

 

HARPREET KAUR

S/o LATE SH. SUKHWINDER SINGH

R/o 411, NEW FRIENDS COLONY,

MAJITHA ROAD AMRITSAR,

PUNJAB-143001,                                               COMPLAINANT

VERSUS

M/s SMV AGENCIES PVT. LTD.

8-C & 9-B, `HANSALAYA`,

15, BARAKHAMBA ROAD,

NEW DELHI-110001                                       OPPOSITE PARTY                                          

Quorum:

Ms. Poonam Chaudhry, President

        Shri Bariq Ahmad , Member

        Ms. Adarsh Nain, Member

                                                                                                                                     Dated of Institution :24.08.2020

                                                                                                                                       Date of Order :11.04.2022

O R D E R

BARIQ AHMAD, MEMBER

Hearing through Video Conferencing.

1. The present complaint has been filed under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (in short CP Act.). Brief facts necessary for the adjudication of the present complaint are that the complainant is a widow as her husband Sukhwinder Singh had expired in 1998,  the Opposite Party had given advertisement for allotment of plot in their Jaipuria Sunrise Green project in NH-24, Indirapuram, Ghaziabad, UP, in June, 2006, the Complainant booked one residential plot of size approx. 200 sq. yrds @ Rs.10,500/- per sq. Yds.in the project of the Opposite Party by the name and style of "Jaipuria's Sunrise Greens" located at NH-24, Village Bahmetha, Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh.
2. Subsequently, the Complainant was filed advance registration form dated 21.06.2006 and paid the registration advance of Rs.4,25,000/- through cheque No.201355 dated 21.06.2006 for the plot.  At the time of booking the complainant was assured that the development of the site would be completed within a span of 2 years and possession would be delivered within a span of a year and a half of the launch of the project. The complainant received a letter dated 11.06.2009 from the opposite party about started development of the project.
3. The complainant time and again inquired about the date of completion of the project, but she was shocked to find that there was not an even a sign board of the Opposite Party and any development progress.
4. That thereafter, complainant kept on asking about the progress of the construction work of plot and kept on contacting opposite Party to know the status of the construction but the opposite Party kept on putting complainant under dark on the pretext of false assurance.
5. That more particularly complainant could never come to know about the sanction of lay out plan of the unit as opposite Party did never share any information about the same.
6. That thereafter on several occasion complainant tried to contact opposite Party also complainant sent a message through whatsapp to one of official of opposite Party to know about the status of plot booked by complainant but she was not given any satisfactory response from the other side rather he was asked to come to its office.
7. That thereafter complainant was of the view that the opposite Party would never be able to hand over the possession of the plot and hence called upon the opposite Party vide legal notice dated 06.01.2020 and thereby demanding refund of his entire paid money to the opposite Party alongwith the interest and compensation for mental harassment and agony but the opposite Party did not pay any heeds towards the same.
8. That as more than 16 years were passed but still neither there was any intimation nor any opposite Party of handing over the possession of the plot. The complainant further stated that despite of the legal notice sent by complainant asking for refund of his money, the complainant did not pay any heeds towards the same and thereafter complainant kept on contacting opposite Party through various email sent to opposite Party from time to time but opposite Party did not pay any heeds towards the same.
9. That from conduct of the opposite Party, it is made clear to complainant that opposite Party has bad intention towards to money deposited by complainant and would not return the hard earned money deposited by complainant with opposite Party. That opposite Party has induced complainant with bad motive to part with his hard earned money in its so called project which was never be intended to be completed by complainant and the same was used as tool to extract the money from complainant which was totally unknown to complainant. It is, further stated that if complainant had known about opposite party's real motive to extract the hard earned money with malafide intention, he would have never booked any plot with opposite Party. Aggrieved by such laxity in keeping the hard earned money of the complainant for nearly 16 years, the complainant approached this commission alleging deficiency of services on part of the Opposite Party, complainant prayed for refund of booking Amount of Rs.4,25,000/- along with a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- as compensation towards physical and mental agony and Rs.45,000/- as litigation cost.
10. Notice of the complaint was sent to the OP but none appeared on behalf of OP, therefore, OP was ordered to be proceeded  ex-parte on 14.02.2022.
11. In order to prove her case the complainant filed his evidence by affidavit on 17.02.2022 and also filed written submission. The complainant placed on record, copy of advance registration form dated 21.06.2006 Mark-Annexure-CW1/1, Copy of letter dated 11.06.2009 and copy of legal notice dated 06.01.2020 with speed postal receipt dated 06.01.2020.
12. We have heard the learned counsel for the complainant and perused the record. The fact that the complainant had booked one plot with the Opposite Party is not in dispute from the evidence on record from advance registration form i.e. Mark CW1/1. However, the complainant has failed to file any booking receipt of an amount of Rs,4,25,000/- paid by the complainant to opposite party as well payment proof in this regard.
13. We are of the considered view that the complainant has not corroborated the contents of its complaint.  The payment proof under which payment was made to opposite party has not been filed. Moreover, the complainant has not filed any documents with regard to allotment letter or any builder buyer agreement. It is settled law that the onus of proof of deficiency in service is on the complainant in the complaints under The Consumer Protection Act-1986. It is fundamental principle of jurisprudence that the onus of proof lying upon the complainant is to prove his case by a preponderance of probabilities and of the evidence.
14. Thus the case of the complaint for grant of relief under the Consumer Protection Act,1986 was not established. Accordingly, the complaint is dismissed in limine but without any order as to costs.

Order accordingly. Office is directed to send one true copy of this order to the parties/speed post in accordance with the rules. This final order be sent to server (www.confonet.nic.in). Thereafter, file be consigned to record room.

Announced on this   11^th  Day of April, 2022.

 

(POONAM CHADHARY)

President

 

        (BARIQ AHMAD)                                          (ADARSH NAIN)

        Member                                                              Member