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.454/2013
MRS. SANTOSH SINGH
42 SAININI ENCLAVE,
NEAR KARKAR DOOMA,
DELHI-110092
…………. COMPLAINANT
Vs.
M/S SUPERTECH LTD.
THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN & MANAGING DIRECTOR
11TH FLOOR, HEMKUNT CHAMBERS,
89, NEHRU PLACE, NEW DELHI-110019
…………..RESPONDENT
Date of Order:20.08.2018
O R D E R
A.S. Yadav - President
The case of the complainant is that on 03.06.2010, she applied for provisional allotment of plot no.A-321 in ‘UPCOUNTRY’ project at Yamuna Expressway Industrial Development Authority (U.P.) and she paid a sum of Rs.3,33,125/- by way of two cheques of which one was for Rs.1,00,000/- dated 29.05.2010 and another was for Rs.2,33,125/- dated 09.06.2010. In July 2010, one Mr. Pramod Mittal of Metrocity Properties, D-2, Sector Alpha-1, Greater Noida had handed over a letter dated 20.07.2010 to the complainant regarding the provisional booking for the aforesaid plot. Sh. Mittal informed the complainant that as regards further payments to be made against the said plot, she will receive separate communication from OP. The complainant waited for communication from OP for making further payment but when she did not receive any communication, she contacted office of OP on 18.10.2012 where she was informed that the booking has been cancelled due to non payment of balance dues. The complainant was shocked as she has not received any letter for making the payment and on the same day a letter was sent by the complainant to OP. In response to that letter, OP sent an email dated 26.10.2012 alongwith copy of cancellation letter dated 12.07.2011 whereby OP has cancelled the booking and forfeited her booking amount of Rs.3,33,125/- and also informed that her request to revive booking in her favour could not be acceded to. On 15.11.2012 the complainant has again served on OP a fresh representation dated 29.10.2012 reiterating her request that her booking in respect of the said plot be revived in her favour as the same was cancelled without providing her any opportunity of being heard. Thereafter the complainant personally met with Director of the company and narrated here grievances but he expressed his inability to extend any help to the complainant. Finally the complainant served a legal notice dated 04.06.2013, however, the booking of the plot was not revived. Terming the action of OP as deficiency in service the present complaint has been filed whereby it is prayed that OP be directed to revive the said booking in favour of the complainant or, in alternate, refund the amount of Rs.3,33,125/- and also sought compensation and litigation expenses.
OP in reply took the plea that there is no deficiency in service on the part of OP. It is submitted that after paying total amount of Rs.3,33,125/- the complainant did not pay further installment, accordingly the booking was cancelled vide letter dated 12.07.2011 and the information of the same was duly communicated to the complainant. It is submitted that after cancellation of plot, the same has been allotted to one Mr. Saurabh Kumar Agarwal who has taken possession of the same on 08.04.2013, therefore, the complaint is not maintainable. It is further stated that after cancellation of the plot, Mr. S.P. Singh, on behalf of the complainant, vide letter dated 29.07.2013 requested OP to refund the amount after 15% deduction from the deposited amount. OP vide email dated 22.07.2013 asked the complainant to comply with some legal formalities but the same was not done It is also stated that from time to time OP informed status of the plot and also asked for the payment due but the same was not made It is prayed that the complaint be dismissed.
We have gone through the case file carefully.
It is an admitted fact that the complainant booked a plot measuring 100 sq. yds in the project of OP and paid a sum of Rs.3,33,125/-. The complainant in her complaint has specifically stated that for making further payment, she waited for communication from OP but she did not receive any communication and thereafter she contacted office of OP on 28.10.2012 whereby she was informed that the plot has been cancelled vide cancellation letter dated 12.07.2011 which was duly sent to the complainant. The complainant has specifically denied about the receipt of any demand notice or cancellation letter. The onus was on OP to prove that demand notice was sent to the complainant for making further payment. Though in reply, OP has stated that from time to time the complainant was asked to make payment but OP has not placed anything on record to show that any demand notice was sent to the complainant. Even the so called cancellation letter dated 12.07.2011 was never sent to the complainant. OP has not placed any AD receipt to show that any demand notice was ever sent to the complainant. The complainant has specifically stated in her letter dated 18.10.2012 that she was shocked to know about the cancellation of the plot as she has not received any demand notice and she requested for restoration of her plot and she further stated that she will pay the due amount against the said plot but OP did not agree to the request of the complainant.
We do not know on what basis the booking amount has been forfeited when there was no fault on the part of the complainant and moreover there is no agreement between the parties regarding the forfeiture of the amount. It does not matter that husband of the complainant has sent a letter to OP whereby he asked OP to refund the amount after deduction of 15% from the booking amount. There was no reason for OP to forfeit the amount. It is a clear cut case of deficiency in service on the part of OP, rather it is an unfair trade practice whereby the allotment has been cancelled without any notice and when the complainant came to know about it, she immediately represented to OP for restoration of the plot but in vain.
OP is directed to refund a sum of Rs.3,33,125/- to the complainant alongwith interest @ 10% p.a. from the date of deposit. OP is further directed to pay Rs.20,000/- towards compensation and Rs.5,000/- towards litigation expenses.
Let the order be complied with 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 consign ned to record room.
(RITU GARODIA) (H.C. SURI) (A.S. YADAV)
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
