Punjab

Rupnagar

CC/19/35

Gurmeet Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

Nature Heights Infra limited - Opp.Party(s)

Sofia Paul

07 Aug 2019

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTT. CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ROPAR

                                 Consumer Complaint No.  35 of 18.04.2019

                                 Date of decision                    :    07.08.2019

 

Sh. Gurmeet Singh, son of Sh. Dalbir Singh, resident of House No.132, Gillco Valley, Ropar  

                                                                 ......Complainant

                                             Versus

1. M/s Nature Heights Infra Limited, 9 Sunder Nagari, Near Children Park, Hanumangarh Road, Abohar, through Managing Director/ Director/ Authorized signatory/General Manager/Manager
2. Sh. Neeraj Thatai, Managing Director of Nature Heights Infra Limited, resident of Street No.9, Sunder Nagari, Abohar.
3. Nature Heights Infra Limited, through Sh. Jasvir Singh Branch Manager, Opposite Sabzi Mandi, Nuhon Colony, Tehsil and District Ropar 

   ....Opposite Parties

                                   Complaint under Section 12 of the                                                      Consumer Protection Act, 1986

QUORUM

 

                        SH. KARNAIL SINGH AHHI, PRESIDENT

                        CAPT. YUVINDER SINGH MATTA, MEMBER

ARGUED BY

 

Ms. Sofia Paul, Adv. counsel for complainant  

O.Ps. exparte 

                                           ORDER

              SH. KARNAIL SINGH AHHI, PRESIDENT

1.         Complainant has filed the present complaint seeking directions to the opposite parties to refund the amount of Rs.1,25,000/-;  to pay Rs.10,000/- to the complainant on account of misc. expenses incurred by the complainant; to pay Rs.20,000/- as compensation;  to pay Rs.10,000/- to represent/perusing the present litigation charges; any other relief which this Hon'ble Forum may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the complaint .

2.    Brief facts made out from the complaint are that the project of the O.Ps. was situated at Village Bringali, Tehsil Mukerian, District Hoshiarpur, which was selling plots of different sizes at various prices. On the allurement of O.Ps, the complainant also booked one plot of 1000 Sq. Feet for a total consideration of Rs.1,25,000/-. It was agreed between both the parties that the complainant/purchaser would be at liberty to pay total sum in installments of Rs.31250/- each. After depositing the full and final payment of Rs.1,25,000/-, the complainant visited the O.Ps but without any outcome. Till date, the O.Ps. are neither available at their address nor have they any alternate address where the complainant can visit them for their grievances. Hence, this complaint   

3.    On being put to notice, none appeared on behalf of O.Ps. No.1 to 3, accordingly, they were proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated 24.07.2019. 

4.    On being called upon to do so, the learned counsel for the complainant has tendered copy of receipts Ex.C1 to Ex.C5 and closed the evidence.

5.    We have heard the learned counsel for the complainant and have gone through the record of the file, carefully.

6.    The learned counsel for the complainant argued that the complainant has been able to prove deficiency on the part of O.Ps. as O.Ps. received Rs.1,25,000/- on different dates. The complaint deserves to be allowed.

7.    The complainant in support of his claim relied upon the documentary evidence Ex.C1 to Ex.C4 and the said receipts were issued by the O.Ps. with stamp of Ropar. Further after notice, none appeared on behalf of O.Ps. Claim of the complainant is exparte. So, it is a consumer dispute and complaint is maintainable.

8.    In the complaint as well as in affidavit it is pleaded by Smt. Gurmeet Singh that there was a plot on behalf of O.Ps. i.e. why the complainant booked the plot of 1000 Sq. Ft and paid four installments on different dates i.e. Rs.1,25,000/-. Beside the said pleadings, the complainant placed on file Ex.C1 to
Ex.4 i.e. receipts of different dates vide which the payment of Rs.1,25,000/- was made. Beside the said evidence, the complainant placed on file the legal notice, copy of the same is Ex.C5. After filing the complaint, notice was issued to the O.Ps. but none appeared on their behalf. Thereafter, the publication process for the due service was adopted. O.Ps. were served the substitute notice through the publication but none appeared. Document Ex.C1 to Ex.C5 and the notice dated 18.8.2018 proves the payment of Rs.1,25,000/-. So, the complainant has been able to prove deficiency in service on the part of O.Ps and the complaint deserves to be allowed.

9.    In the light of discussion made above, the complaint stands allowed exparte with the directions to the O.Ps. to refund Rs.1,25,000/- along with interest @ 7.5% per annum w.e.f. the date of deposit.

10.  The cert ified copies of this order be supplied to the parties forthwith, free of costs, as permissible under the rules and the file be indexed and consigned to Record Room.          

 

                     ANNOUNCED                                    (KARNAIL SINGH AHHI)

                     Dated.07.08.2019                           PRESIDENT
 

 

 

                                      (CAPT. YUVINDER SINGH MATTA)

                                                                   MEMBER