Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

CC/112/2017

M/s.Pushpa Sanjeevi - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s.Rich India Housing Private Ltd., - Opp.Party(s)

S.Mahendran

27 Oct 2022

ORDER

Date of Complaint Filed : 27.02.2017

Date of Reservation      : 26.09.2022

Date of Order               : 27.10.2022

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

CHENNAI (SOUTH), CHENNAI-3.

 

PRESENT:    TMT. B. JIJAA, M.L.,                                            : PRESIDENT

                       THIRU. T.R. SIVAKUMHAR, B.A., B.L.,           :  MEMBER  I 

                       THIRU. S. NANDAGOPALAN., B.Sc., MBA.,   : MEMBER II

 

CONSUMER COMPLAINT No. 112/2017

THURSDAY, THE 27^th DAY OF OCTOBER 2022

Mrs. Pushpa Sanjeevi,

W/o Sanjeevi,

No.30 Kalaignar Road,

Anna Nagar,

Pammal,

Chennai – 600 075.                                                          …   Complainant

 

-Vs-

 

M/s. Rich India Housing Private Ltd,

Rep by its Chairman,

No.7/3 “Arul Illam”,

Subramania Nagar,

1^st Cross Street,

Kodambakkam,

Chennai – 600 024.                                                      ...   Opposite Party

******

Counsel for the Complainant           : M/s. S. Mahendran

Counsel for the Opposite Party        : Exparte

 

        On perusal of records and having heard the oral arguments of the Counsel for the Complainant, we delivered the following:

ORDER

Pronounced by Member-II, Thiru. S. Nandagopalan., B.Sc., MBA.,

1.      The Complainant has filed this complaint as against the Opposite Party under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and prays to return the above payment of advance a sum of Rs.40,000/- to the Complainant with interest 24% and to pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- towards mental agony and monetary loss and to pay  sum of Rs.10,000/- towards the cost.

2.     The averments of Complaint in brief are as follows:-

            The Complainant submits that on 06.09.2016 he approached the Opposite Party for purchasing plots in Arakkonam, Tiruvallur District. The Complainant booked four plots for total sum of Rs.4,10,000/- hence the Complainant paid advance payment a sum of Rs.40,000/- to the Opposite Party through Cheque dated 06.09.2016 vide No.000880349 drawn on StateBank of India, Pallavaram Branch Chennai and further Complainant Paid remaining payment of Rs.3,70,000/ through Cheque dated 13.9.2016. The Opposite Party also issued the receipt to the Complainant. The Complainant submits the above advance payment Rs.40,000/- was honoured and received by the Opposite Party. While being so, the Hon'ble High Court was pleased to pass a Judgement against the department of registration and other concerned departments to restrain from the registration of unapproved plots, panchayat board approved plots and agricultural land etc. Therefore the registration of above plots could not be effected by the Opposite Party and further the Opposite Party also returned the above cheque for sum of Rs.3,70,000/- to the Complainant, in turn the Complainant surrendered the above receipts to the Opposite Party's authorized executive namely T.Venkatesh Kumar and Complainant demanded the repayment of above advance payment the Opposite Party also assured the Complainant to repay the above amount within 15 days but the Opposite Party failed to pay the same till date. The Complainant further submits that in spite of Complainant's repeated demand and oral request the Opposite Party never heeded the Complainant's request and not returned the above advance payment so far hence the Complainant sent a letter dated 02.01.2017 to the Opposite Party calling upon to pay the above advance amount with interest within 15 days from the date of receipt of the above letter, despite the receipt of above letter the Opposite Party still not settled the above advance payment to the Complainant and committed the deficiency of service and adopted the unfair trade practice and still evading from its liability due to which the Complainant was put to mental agony and monetary loss. Hence this Complaint.

3.      The Complainant submitted his Proof Affidavit and Written Arguments. On the side of the Complainant, documents were marked as Ex.A-1 to Ex.A-4

4.     The Opposite Party did not appear before this Commission even sufficient notice served and remained set exparte.

Points for Consideration

1. Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party?

2. Whether the Complainant is entitled for reliefs claimed?

3. To what other reliefs the Complainant is entitled?

 

 

Point No 1 :-

On careful perusal of Complaint it is noticeable that the Complainant approached the Opposite Party for purchasing of plots at Arakkonam, the total cost of 4 plots booked by the Complainant is Rs.4,10,000/- and as an advance payment Complainant paid a sum of Rs.40,000/- to the Opposite Party drawn through State Bank Of India with cheque No.000880349 dated 06.09.2016 as seen in Ex.A-1 i.e , Bank passbook. Moreover, the Complainant alleges in the complaint that the balance amount of Rs.3,70,000/- was also paid through cheque dated 13.09.2016 , but there is no relevant evidence enclosed to substantiate the claim made by the Complainant in the averments. The Complainant even failed to produce the receipt given by the Opposite Party as averred in the complaint. As per the Complainant averments it is alleged that the Hon'ble High Court was pleased to pass a Judgement against the department of registration and other concerned departments to restrain from the registration of unapproved plots, panchayat board approved plots and agricultural lands, therefore the registration of above plots could not be executed by the Opposite Party, henceforth the Complainant submits that the Opposite Party returned the cheque of Rs.3,70,000/- to the Complainant by collecting back the receipt issued by them. As again the Complainant failed to produce any such relevant documents to authenticate the contentions in the complaint that the Opposite Party adopted the unfair trade practice. Since there is no appropriate material evidence enclosed by the Complainant to validate the allegations made on the Opposite Party Unfair trade practice and deficiency of service is not justifiable. Moreover the above complaint and the dispute on the alleged payment is towards purchase of Plots concerned immovable property and hence will not fall under the purview of the  Consumer Protection Act. Hence the Complaint is dismissed. Point No.1 is answered.

Point Nos.2 &3:-

As discussed and decided Point No.1 against the Complainant, the Complainant is not entitled for the reliefs claimed in the complaint. And hence the Complainant is not entitled for any other relief/s. Accordingly, Point Nos.2 and 3 are answered.

In the result the Complaint is dismissed. No costs.

Dictated to Steno-Typist, transcribed and typed by her, corrected and pronounced by us in the Open Commission, on 27^th of October 2022. 

 

 

S. NANDAGOPALAN               T.R. SIVAKUMHAR                 B.JIJAA

         MEMBER II                       MEMBER I                        PRESIDENT

 

List of documents filed on the side of the Complainant:-

 

Ex.A1	-	Complainant’s Bank Pass Book
Ex.A2	02.01.2017	Complainant’s Letter to the Opposite Party
Ex.A3	03.01.2017	Copy Acknowledgement Card
Ex.A4	-	Copy of Brochure issued by Opposite Party

 

 

List of documents filed on the side of the Opposite Party:-

 

NIL

 

 

 

 

S. NANDAGOPALAN               T.R. SIVAKUMHAR                   B.JIJAA

         MEMBER II                       MEMBER I                         PRESIDENT