Order-14.
Date-22/09/2016.
This is an application u/s.12 of the C.P. Act, 1986.
Case of the complainant, in short, is that he booked one plot vide no.CO4 at its project Madhuban at Mauza – Balakhali, Dag No.358, Khaitan No.4, P.S. Bishnupur, South 24 Pgs with OP and entered into an agreement with OP for sale dated 21-09-2010 and paid Rs.80,000/- as the earnest money and also paid the rest amount that is Rs.3,20,000/- in 48 equal monthly instalment against receipt. The entire payment was completed on 10-10-2014 but despite completion of the entire payment complainant noticed that there was no development in the project site and there was no likelihood of delivery of the plot of land with the infrastructure to the complainant. The complainant orally requested the OP to refund the amount of Rs.4 lakhs to the complainant and he was advised to deposit all the payment receipts in original and the agreement dated 21-09-2010 in original and accordingly the complainant vide letter dated 13-02-2015 requested the OP to cancel the agreement dated 21-09-2015 and to refund the entire amount of Rs.4 lakh to the complainant enclosing all the original payment receipts and agreement for sale dated 21-09-2010 in original. The OP received the letter and asked the complainant to wait till June, 2016 for refund. The complainant wrote to the OP on 02-04-2015 expressing his disagreement to wait till June, 2016 for the refund to which the OP did not reply. The complainant sent legal notice dated 15-03-2016 but to no good. The complainant has alleged deficiency of service and unfair trade practice against the OP. Hence, this case.
OP has contested the case in filing written version contending, inter alia, that the complaint is liable to be dismissed in fact and in law. It is submitted that the agreement for sale is not properly stamped and document is inadmissible in evidence and is also stated that on account of delayed payment of monthly instalments the complainant is liable to pay Rs.67,680/- as interest. It is denied that there is no development in the project site as alleged. It is also stated that the complainant is not entitled to get Rs.4 lakhs or there was no deficiency of service on the part of the OP. This OP has prayed for dismissal of the case.
Point for Decision
- Whether the OP is guilty of deficiency of service and unfair trade practice?
- Whether the complainant is entitled to get the relief as prayed for?
Decision with Reasons
We have perused the documents on record namely photocopies of agreement for allotment duly notarized, letter of the complainant dated 13-02-2015 to the OP for refund of money, letter dated 20-02-2015 of the OP assuring the refund from June, 20916 onwards, legal notice and other documents on record.
It appears that the complainant entered into an agreement with the OP in respect of the subject plot of land and paid Rs.80,0000/- as earnest money and subsequently paid the remaining amount of Rs.3,20,000/- in 48 monthly instalments against receipts. It appears that OP has not developed the land with infrastructure in spite of receiving entire consideration amount. Ld. Lawyer appearing for the OP has argued that the agreement is not properly stamped and it is not admissible but we think that as Consumer Court, the Forum is concerned with the proposition of deficiency of service and unfair trade practice, moreover, we find that stamp paper was purchased by the OP itself and OP has signed in it and the agreement was executed by OP itself. We think that OP cannot take such plea at this point of time. Moreover, the alleged document may be impounded at any time. So, we think that execution of such agreement without proper stamp cannot spoil the case of the complainant. Fact remains, that OP in spite of receiving the entire consideration amount, has not developed the project and there is no likelihood of delivery of plot of land with infrastructure to the complainant. The complainant also contacted the OP for refund of money but to no good. We find that the complainant has run from pillar to post and back to pillar without any fruitful result. OP, we think, has been deficient in rendering services to the complainant and they have also indulged in unfair trade practice. OP has utilized the amount of Rs.4 lakhs for personal gain but has not developed the project. We think that OP has exhibited a gesture of unfair trade practice and deficiency of service.
In result, the case succeeds.
Hence,
Ordered
That the instant case be and the same is allowed on contest against the OP with cost of Rs.10,000/-.
OP is directed to refund Rs.4 lakhs along with interest w.e.f. 21-09-2010 till compliance within one month from the date of this order.
OP is also directed to pay an amount of Rs.1 lakh to the complainant for mental trauma, harassment and unfair trade practice, within the said stipulated time.
Failure to comply with the order will entitle the complainant to put the order into execution u/s.25 read with Section 27 of the C.P. Act and in that case OP shall be liable to pay penal damage at the rate ofRs.5,000/- to be paid to this Forum till full and final satisfaction of the decree.
