DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SAHIBZADA AJIT SINGH NAGAR (MOHALI)

Consumer Complaint No.252 of 2018

                                               Date of institution:  26.02.2018                                         Date of decision   :  09.11.2018

Smt. Deepika Teji daughter of Shri Om Parkash Teji, resident of House No.2615, Phase-XI, Mohali (Punjab).  

…….Complainant

Versus

1.     Nature Heights Infra Ltd. through Shri Neeraj Arora (Managing Director) 9, Sunder Nagari, Hanumangarh Road, Abohar (Punjab).

2.     Nature Heights Infra Ltd. through Shri Ankit Kumar, Branch Manager, SCO No.20, Phase-1, Mohali.

                                                        ……..Opposite Parties

Complaint under Section 12 of

the Consumer Protection Act.

Quorum:   Shri G.K. Dhir, President,

                Shri Amrinder Singh Sidhu, Member

                Mrs. Natasha Chopra, Member.

Present:    Ms. Sofia Paul, counsel for complainant.

OPs ex-parte.

Order by :-  Shri G.K. Dhir, President.

Order

               Complainant on approach by OPs for booking of plot of 1500 sq. ft. for residential purpose, paid Rs.1,31,250/- on different dates. Agreement for sale was executed. OPs were called upon to declare the date of completing process for delivery of possession, on which they assured complainant to inform about the date of delivery of physical possession of the plot. Complainant claims that OPs in fact have not obtained no objection certificate/approval of the maps and other clearances from Govt. departments. Complainant approached Mohali Branch Manager of OPs for refund of money, but same even has not been allowed and that is why by pleading deficiency in service on part of OPs, prayer made for directing OPs to refund deposited amount of Rs.1,31,250/- with compound interest @ 16% per annum w.e.f. 12.01.2013 till payment. Compensation for mental harassment and agony also claimed.

2.             OPs are ex-parte in this case.

3.             Complainant to prove her case tendered in evidence her affidavit Ex.CW-1/1 alongwith documents Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-4 and thereafter her counsel closed evidence.

4.             Written arguments not submitted. Oral arguments heard and records gone through.

5.             Undisputedly receipts produced on record establishes deposit of different amounts by complainant, but after going through agreement of sale Ex.C-2, it is made out that property/plot agreed to be purchased is situate in village Village Dhanera, Tehsil Anandpur, District Ropar. In the agreement itself it is mentioned that vendor will obtain all kinds of NOC, permissions and income tax clearances before delivery of possession of the plot/land/property anywhere in village Village Dhanera, Tehsil Anandpur, District Ropar. So from the contents of agreement itself it is made out that possession of the plot/land/property was to be delivered in area of Tehsil Anandpur, District Ropar. As plot/property in question is situate in village Village Dhanera, Tehsil Anandpur, District Ropar and as such the sale deed also to be executed there. Grievance of the complainant is that clearances have not been got by OPs from departments and that is why possession of the plot/property could not be delivered by OPs. So virtually on account of breach of terms of agreement by OPs, cause of action accrued to complainant for filing this complaint in District Ropar because promise for delivery of possession of plot has taken place in that area. Question of making payments at Mohali and other places in such circumstances pales into insignificance, more so when agreement Ex.C-2 was executed at Abohar, Tehsil Abohar. There is clear cut stipulation in the agreement that in the event of any dispute/differences between the parties, the matter liable to be decided by courts at Abohar. However, property in question is situate in Ropar District and cause of action accrued in that area, as discussed above, and as such complaint could have been filed in the District Consumer Forum having jurisdiction over Anandpur area.

6.             Relying on case of Sonic Surgical Vs. National Insurance Company Ltd. 2010(1) CLT 252 of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India and of case Girish Ahuja Vs. Panchsheel Colonizers Pvt. Ltd. 2018(2) CPR 278 (NC), Hon’ble Punjab State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chandigarh in First Appeal No.807 of 2017 titled as Preet Pal Vs. M/s. Nature Heights Infra Limited decided on 13.07.2018 has held that in cases relating to immovable property, jurisdiction to entertain lis is with the Fora within whose jurisdiction the suit property is situate. These are in fact observations of Hon’ble National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in case of Girish Ahuja Vs. Panchsheel Colonizers Pvt. Ltd. (supra) and that is why Hon’ble Punjab State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chandigarh held that cause of action in the event of breach of agreement of sale of plot/property accrue within territorial jurisdiction of the Forum, where property is situate. Ratio of these cases fully applicable to the facts of the present case and as such in view of property/plot in question being situate in territorial jurisdiction of Ropar Forum, the complaint deserves to be presented in that Forum. This Forum has no territorial jurisdiction to entertain the complaint because no cause of action arose within the territorial jurisdiction of this Forum and as such complaint returned for presentation before the Forum having territorial jurisdiction in accordance with law.

7.             As a sequel of above discussion, complaint ordered to be returned to complainant for presentation before the Forum having territorial jurisdiction in accordance with law. Certified copies of the order be supplied to the parties as per rules.  File be indexed and consigned to record room.

Announced

November 09, 2018.

                                                                (G.K. Dhir)

                                                                President

(Amrinder Singh Sidhu)

Member

(Mrs. Natasha Chopra)

Member