Punjab

Fatehgarh Sahib

CC/45/2016

Gobind Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

Nature Heights - Opp.Party(s)

Sh Damandeep Singh

04 Aug 2017

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, FATEHGARH SAHIB.

                             Consumer Complaint No.45 of 2016

                                                          Date of institution:  18.04.2016                                    

                                                          Date of decision   :  04.08.2017

Gobind Singh, aged about 43 years, son of Sh. Mohinder Singh, resident of Preet Nagar, Aam Khas Bagh, now resident of Modern Valley, #175, near Jain Mandir, Chandigarh Road, Village Attewali, Post Office Manupur, Tehsil  and District Fatehgarh Sahib.

……..Complainant

Versus

1. Nature Heights Infra Limited, #9, Sunder Nagri, Hanumangarh Road, Abohar- 152116, Tehsil and District Abohar through its Director/authorized person.
2. Nature Heights Infra Limited, # 9, branch at Chungi No.4, near Guru Ram Dass Sweets, Bassi Road, Sirhind, Tehsil and District Fatehgarh Sahib through its Director/authorized person.
3. Nature Heights Infra Limited, C/o Nature Way Store, near Gurudwara Dukh Niwaran Sahib, Guru Tegh Bahadur Market, Patiala, Tehsil and District Patiala through its authorized person Harnek Singh.

 …..Opposite parties    

Complaint Under Sections  11 to 14 of the Consumer Protection Act

Quorum

Sh. Ajit Pal Singh Rajput, President                                       Sh. Inder Jit, Member     

 

Present :      Sh.Damandeep Singh, Adv.Cl. for the complainant.                         Opposite party No.3 exparte.

                   None for OPs No. 1 & 2.

ORDER

By Ajit Pal Singh Rajput, President

•                         Gobind Singh, aged about 43 years, son of Sh. Mohinder Singh, resident of Preet Nagar, Aam Khas Bagh, now resident of Modern Valley, #175, near Jain Mandir, Chandigarh Road, Village Attewali, Post Office Manupur, Tehsil  and District Fatehgarh Sahib, has filed this complaint against the Opposite parties (hereinafter referred to as “the OPs”) under Sections 11 to 14 of the Consumer Protection Act. The brief facts of the complaint are as under:

2.                In order to purchase a residential plot, the complainant contacted OP No.2, who showed booklet/brochure of the colony to be carved out at village Badingli, Tehsil Mukerian, District Hoshiarpur.  The said project of the OPs was also known as ' Talwara Project'. The total cost of one plot of 2000 sq. feet was Rs.2,50,000/- and the amount was payable in four installments of Rs.62,500/- each. The complainant accepted the proposal and as per directions and demand of the OPs, he deposited the booking amount-cum- first installment of Rs.62,500/- with OP No.2 at Sirhind vide receipt No.16933/670676 dated 27.09.2011. Thereafter on 15.10.2011, an agreement for sale was executed between the complainant and OPs in the office of OP No.2, where authorized signatory on behalf of OP No.1 was also present. The OPs did not supply or explain the remaining information regarding plot number, its dimensions and direction to the complainant even after lapse of 11 months from the date of execution of the sale agreement. Thereafter the complainant approached OP No.2 who told the complainant that firstly he is to deposit the second installment of the said plot.  Then the complainant deposited the second installment of Rs.62,500/- with OP No.2 vide receipt No.103417 dated 10.10.2012. But no such details were supplied to the complainant by the OPs. The complainant visited the office of OP No.2, where Harnek Singh, authorized person of OP No.3, disclosed that the land of project called 'Talwara' was not allotted to the Ops and therefore, they will not receive the remaining installments of Rs.62,500/- from the complainant and whenever the project land will be allotted to the OPs, they will continue to receive the remaining amount.  But till date, no such details have been sent to the complainant. As per one of the terms and conditions of the said agreement, it was agreed that " if a good and marketable title is not made out due to any reason, then the purchaser would be at liberty to rescind the agreement and vendor would be bound to pay 13% interest p.a. compounded growth to his sum already paid within three months of the rescinding and demands". The complainant again visited the office of OP No.2 and requested to return the amount of Rs.1,25,000/- alongwith compounded interest but to no effect.  Since January 2014, the complainant requested OPs a number of times to return the said amount but in vain.  Thereafter in the month of January 2015, the complainant was directed to fill certain forms of OPs so that his amount with interest is deposited directly in his account. But no such amount was received by the complainant in his account.  Thereafter the OPs put pressure on the complainant to the effect that he should purchase some other plot at a higher rate in some other city but complainant refused to do so. The act and conduct of the OPs amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. Hence, this complaint for giving directions to the OPs to refund Rs. 1,25,000/- alongwith compounded interest and further to pay Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation for mental tension, pain agony and harassment suffered by the complainant.

3.                Notice of the complaint was issued to the OPs and Ms. Shivani Singla, Adv. appeared on behalf of the OPs but later on she withdrew her power of attorney on behalf of OP No.3. Then OP No.3 was served through publication in newspaper but OP No.3 chose not to appear to contest this complaint. Hence, OP No.3 was proceeded against exparte. OPs No.1 & 2 failed to file written version despite several opportunities, therefore, their right to file written version was struck off.

4.                In order to prove his complaint, the complainant tendered his affidavit Ex. C-1, true copies of documents Ex. C-2 to Ex. C-6 and closed the evidence. OPs No.1 & 2 failed to tender any evidence despite several opportunities. Hence, the evidence of OPs No.1 & 2 was closed by order.

5.                The ld. counsel for the complainant argued that as per the agreement of sale dated 15.10.2011 i.e Ex. C-6 the OPs were required to handover the possession after completion in 4^th year. The ld. counsel pleaded that the complainant regularly paid the installments as the same is evident from the copies of receipts i.e Ex-C-3 & C-4. The ld. counsel stated that when the complainant visited the site, the complainant came to know that no land has been purchased by the OPs what to speak of any construction. It was also disclosed by Mr. Harnek Singh, authorized person of OPs, who was one of the members of the governing team of the company, that land of the project called' Talwara' was not  yet allotted, so they are not receiving the remaining installments. The ld. counsel argued that the OPs have violated the terms of the agreement i.e Ex. C-6 and have thus unnecessarily caused mental tension and physical harassment to the complainant. He further submitted that it has been well established that the OPs have committed deficiency in service and played unfair trade practice and the complainant deserves to be compensated for the same. Ld. counsel pleaded for acceptance of his complaint and penalizing the OPs for deficiency in service and unfair trade practice.

6.                Inspite of the proper and effective service of notice to the OPs, non-appearance of OP No.3 and filing of power of attorney by OP No.1 & 2 and later on neither submitting any written version nor tendering any evidence and not appearing for arguments despite several opportunities, in itself proves that they have nothing to say and is in admission on their part.

7.                After hearing the Ld. Counsel for the complainant and going through the pleadings and evidence produced by him and oral submissions, we find force in the submissions made by the ld. counsel for the complainant. In our view it is well established from the Agreement of Sale dated 15.10.2011 that the terms and conditions set out therein have been violated by the OPs.  It is also well established from the installment receipts i.e Ex.C-3 & Ex.C-4 that the complainant had till date paid two installments totaling Rs.1,25,000/- to the OPs

8.                Accordingly, in view of our aforementioned discussion, we find that the OPs have deliberately committed deficiency in service and caused mental agony as well as physical harassment to the complainant. Hence, we direct the OPs to refund the amount of Rs.1,25,000/- as mentioned in installment receipts i.e Ex.C-3 & Ex.C-4 alongwith 13% compound interest PA from the respective dates of deposit till its realization. Complainant is also held entitled to the damages suffered by him on account of physical harassment and mental tension. The damages are assessed at Rs.20,000/- and litigation cost of Rs.5000/-. OPs are directed to comply with the order of this Forum within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of this order. In case the OPs fails to comply with this order the OPs shall also be held liable to pay 9 % interest on the costs awarded till its realization. The present complaint is allowed.  

9.                    The arguments on the complaint were heard on 21.07.2017 and the order was reserved. Now the order be communicated to the parties. Copy of the order be sent to the parties free of cost and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room.

Pronounced

Dated:04.08.2017

(A.P.S.Rajput)

President

 

(Inder Jit)      

Member