Delhi

New Delhi

CC/395/2013

Pinky Aggarwal - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/S. Taneja Developers & Infrastructure Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

17 Jul 2015

ORDER

CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-VI

(DISTT. NEW DELHI), ‘M’ BLOCK, 1^STFLOOR,

VIKAS BHAWAN, I.P.ESTATE,

NEW DELHI-110002.

 

Case No.CC/395/13                                                                                                                                                                               Dated:

In the matter of:

Mrs. Pinky Aggarwal,

W/o Rajender Aggarwal,

132, Taradeep, Model Town East, Ghaziabad

……..COMPLAINANT

       

VERSUS

M/s. TDI Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd.,

Formerly INTIME PROMOTERS (P) Ltd.,

9, K.G Marg, New Delhi-110001

                                         ……. OPPOSITE PARTY

 

ORDER (Oral)

Date of Arguments: 17.17.2015

President: C.K Chaturvedi

Present:    Both the parties.

                Arguments heard at length.

 

The short facts of complaint are that Complainant got transferred in her name a shop measuring 500 Sq.ft. on LGF floor in Park Street Commercial Shopping Mall (Near Tau Devi Lal Parl), on main G.T Road, Sonepat, of OP, which was earlier booked by an another person. Payment plan was construction linked. Complainant paid Rs.7,15,000/- on 09.07.19, which was part of 30%, which was to be paid at the time of booking at stage of excavation. Thereafter, Complainant found no construction, being in construction linked plan and demand was to be raised on start of casting level etc. Demand letter dated 29.07.2010, and various reminders of 03.09.2010 and 02.12.2010, issued by OP do not show any stage of construction or explain any construction linked demand. By letter dated 13.01.12, allotment was cancelled.

The OP has filed a reply alleging cancellation of shop on non-payment of final payment and also taken a plea that she is not a consumer, being allotee of commercial shop.

We have heard both parties, perused reply and evidence and found that OP cancelled allotment in 2012, though allegedly, taking excuse of no payment when in actual no demand was arising due to non construction. Therefore, it should have return the amount after nominal deduction of 10% of amount paid and sent the balance to the complainant, which OP has failed to do so. Hence, we hold OP guilty of deficiency and direct it to deduct 10% of amount paid and return the balance amount along with interest of 9% from date of cancellation of shop. We also award a compensation of Rs.25,000/- for harassment inclusive of litigation expenses.

The order shall be complied within 30 days of the receipt of the copy of the order; otherwise action can be taken under Section 25 / 27 of the Consumer Protection Act.

File be consigned to record room.

Copy of the order be sent to the parties free of cost.

 

        Pronounced in open Court on 17.07.2015.

 

 

(C.K.CHATURVEDI)

PRESIDENT

 

 (Ritu Garodia)

MEMBER