Delhi

New Delhi

CC/995/2012

Rashmi Jain - Complainant(s)

Versus

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

30 Oct 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/995/12                       Dated:

In the matter of:

SMT RASHMI JAIN,

W/O SHRI NEERAJ JAIN,

R/o 122, IST FLOOR,

POKET 12, SEC-24, ROHINI,

Delhi -110085

                 ……..COMPLAINANT

 

VERSUS

 

M/s. TDI INFRASTRUCTURES LTD.

(FORMERLY INTIME PEROMOTERS (P) LTD.)

9, KASTURBA GANDHI MARG,

New Delhi-01

 

ALSO AT:

M/S. TDI INFRASTRUCTURES LTD.

UG FLOOR, VANDANA BUILDING,

11 TOLSTOY MARG, CONNAUGH PLACE,

NEW DELHI-01  

………. OPPOSITE PARTY

 

ORDER

Member: Ritu Garodia

The complaint pertains to unjustified cancellation and non refund of amount deposited by OP builder.  The Complainant has booked a two bedrooms residential flat and paid Rs.1,55,000/- and Rs.1,45,000/- on 11.4.2006 and 19.4.2006 respectively.  An application form and receipts of OP Company annexed.  A letter dt.10.9.2006 was sent demanding Rs.2,50,000/- which was duly paid. Receipts dated 18.9.2006 annexed.  OP allotted G5-0102 vide letter dated 6.10.2006.  OP sent letter dt. 27.6.2007, 1.9.2007, 15.4.2008, 22.11.2008, 19.3.1010, 27.8.2009, 1.9.2010 and 22.9.2010 demanding further payment.      Complainant has sent letter dated 20.1.2009, 31.3.2009 stating that only columns of “G Block” up to ground level have been constructed.  Complainant had also sent letter dated 20.10.2010 and 11.7.2010 stating that construction has not been progressing in “G-Block”.  Two statement of account has been annexed dated 27.6.2007 and 27.8.2009 which details payment according to construction linked program.

OP has filed its reply stating that an agreement was signed in the form of registration form in which timely payment is of essence.  In para C, OP has alleged in case of cancellation the, amount paid to the broker shall be adjusted in the account of Complainant.  OP has also admitted all the letters annexed with the complaint.  The unit got cancelled vide letter dated 22.9.2015.  It has been reiterated that OP is customer friendly organization time and again and the amount paid by Complainant is forfeited.

We have given due consideration to the arguments, pleadings and correspondences between the parties.  The booking of a two bedroom flat and payment of Rs.5,50,000/- is not disputed by any party.  There are two statement of account raised by OP which reveals that payment was based on construction link plan.  OP in letters dated 27.6.2007, 1.9.2007, 15.4.2008, demanded payment without stating the status of the construction of the project in question.  It was only in letter dated 25.11.2008,  OP stated that it has started “ground floor roof slab of your tower          G-5“ demanding further payment Complainant in its reply had sent letter dated 20.1.2009, and 31.3.2009 wherein it was stated that a site visit reveals only columns of G-Block have been constructed and the progress of the work is almost nil.

OP in spite of no construction at that point of time kept on demanding money with impunity. Time was of an essence for both parties.  If one party delays in construction and performing their part of agreement, can it be expected from the other party to keep to the agreement and continue paying in spite of delay in the project? It appears that after delaying the construction and charging 21% interest on the demand due, OP wants to wriggle out of its commitment and defeat the legitimate right of the complainant.  This fact clearly demonstrates that such projects were launched with specific purpose of colleting money from public from very inception.  There was no intention to honor the commitment and obligation that arose out of these projects.

OP even after admitting that amount spent on brokerage would be adjusted in the account of complainant, ended up forfeiting the entire amount though no such clause/condition exists in registration form. Such unscrupulous and unethical acts of OP falls within the meaning of unfair trade practice as defined under CPA.  We, therefore direct OP to refund Rs.5,50,000/- with 18% interest from date of deposit till payment.  We also award        Rs.1,00,000/- as damages for harassment and financial difficulties caused due to exploitative and mala-fide conduct of OP builders.

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 30.10.2015.

 

 

       

(C.K.CHATURVEDI)

PRESIDENT

 

 

(RITU GARODIA)

MEMBER