Delhi

New Delhi

CC/214/2013

Vinod Kumar Chabbra - Complainant(s)

Versus

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

02 Mar 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/214/13                                                                                                                                                                                Dated:

In the matter of:

1. SH. VINOD KUMAR CHABBRA

S/O LATE SH. K.L. CHABBRA

R/O 5/104, GROUND FLOOR,

SUBHASH NAGAR,

NEW DELHI-110027

 

2. SH. RAJKUMAR BATHLA

S/O LATE GOPAL DASS

R/O 6/1 SUBHASH NAGAR,

NEW DELHI-110027

 

 

                   ……..COMPLAINANT

 

VERSUS

 

TDI INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED

THROUGH ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY/

MANAGING DIRECTOR

UPPER GROUND FLOOR,

VANDANA BUILDING,

11, TOLSTOY MARG,

CONNAUGHT PLACE,

NEW DELHI-110001

 

 

………. OPPOSITE PARTY

 

 

ORDER

Member :  Ritu Garodia

 

The complaint is pertaining to deficiency in service on the part of OP for non refund of deposited amount.

The short fact of complaint are that Rs.3,00,000/- was deposited with OP as advance registration in ESPANIA ROYALE FLOOR (KRF) Kamaspur, Sonepat.  Receipt of same dated 07.3.12 is annexed with complaint.  On 23.5.12, OP sent a demand letter for Rs.4,40,394/- toward installment at the time of allotment but no allotment was mentioned in the letter.  Complainant paid by cheque while informing OP that the said cheque to be en-cashed only on allotment.  However, OP presented the cheque without allotting any unit which consequently got dishonored.  OP on 19.7.12 cancelled the booking.  The complainant therefore filed this complaint for refund of amount deposited.

OP in its reply admitted the booking vide advance registration in the aforementioned project.  OP has also annexed duly signed registration form and stated that complainant should have adhered strictly to terms and conditions along with conditions of cancellation.  The OP also admitted demand letter dated 23.5.12 as per agreed terms and has stated that complainant failed to make payment.  OP also states that when complaint finally made the payment, the cheque in question was dishonored and hence the booking was cancelled vide letter dated 19.7.12.

We have heard the counsel of parties and perused the record file.  Both the complainant and OP admits the booking vide advanced registration form.  Agreement mention payment Plan B which is also annexed and reproduces as follows.

Construction Payment Plan

 

Sr.No.	Installment Plan	Percentages(%)
1	Registration Amount	15%
2	At the time of allotment	15%
3	Within 60 days from the date of allotment	10%
4	At the start of ground floor	10%
5	At the start of first floor	10%
6	At the start of second floor	10%
7	At the start of fourth floor	10%
8	Completion of Brick work	10%
9	At the time of possession	10%
	Grand Total	100%

Letter dated 23.5.12 has also been admitted Scrutiny of the said letter reveals and is reproduced as below “an amount of Rs.440394/- towards installment i.e. at the time of allotment has fallen due” and should be paid on or before 7^th June 2012.  Nonetheless, there is no mention of allotment no or any unit no vide which the allotment by OP has been done.

The question which arises for consideration is that when OP has failed to fulfill its own terms and conditions in its admitted advance registration form, what is the recourse available to complaint.  Is complainant still expected to fulfill the terms and conditions of Agreement without allotment while being in dark about the status of project and continue making the payment.  OP in this complaint has unjustly with a cavalier attitude kept and enjoyed the complainant’s money, with no intention of either refunding it or fulfilling his own part of agreement.  Credibility of OP’s claim that the cancellation stems from incomplete payment is completely destroyed by the factum of non allotment to complaint till date.  The complainant had made the payment in 07.3.12 and has neither received the refund nor any allotment.  OP has used the complainant’s money for its own profit whereas the innocent consumer was running from pillar to post to get back his own hard earned money.

We, therefore, hold OP guilty of deficiency in service and direct OP to refund Rs.3,00,000/- with 12% interest from date of deposit to realization.  We also award Rs.50,000/- as compensation for harassment mental agony, inconvenience including of litigation expenses.

The order shall be complied with 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.

Copy of the order be sent to the parties free

of cost.

Pronounced in open Court on 02.03.2015.

 

(C.K.CHATURVEDI)

PRESIDENT

 

 

(S.R. CHAUDHARY)               (RITU GARODIA)

MEMBER                                 MEMBER