BEFORE THE STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION AT PUDUCHERRY
THURSDAY, the 5th day of November, 2015
CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO.4/2015
G. Vijayalatha, rep. by her Power Agent
S. Gunaseelan,
S/o T.K. Srinivasan
No.158, Om Sakthi Illam,
Anugraha-ECR,
Navasakthi Township
Periyakattupalayam
Cuddalore District – 605 007.
………… Complainant
Vs.
Navasakthi Townships Developers Pvt. Ltd.,
Rep. by its Managing Director
K.I. Manirathinem
Having his Office at East Coast Road,
(Puducherry-Cuddalore Road)
Periyakattupalayam, Ariyankuppam Post
Puducherry – 605 007.
…………… Opposite Party
BEFORE:
HON’BLE THIRU JUSTICE K.VENKATARAMAN
PRESIDENT
TMT. K.K.RITHA,
MEMBER
THIRU S.TIROUGNANASSAMBANDANE,
MEMBER
FOR THE COMPLAINANT:
M/s Law Solvers (Advocate)
FOR THE OPPOSITE PARTIES:
Ex parte
O R D E R
This complaint is filed praying for a direction to the Opposite Party to repay to the complainant the advance amount of Rs.13.50 lakhs towards the agreement dated 29.06.2010 along with interest at 18% per annum; directing the Opposite Party to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs.15.00 lakhs towards compensation for mental agony and loss of revenue and for direction to the Opposite Party to pay to the complainant an amount of Rs.25,000/- towards the cost of the complaint.
2. The short matrix of the complaint is set out hereunder:
The complainant had purchased an extent of 2400 sq. ft. in the Anugraha Satellite Township from one Mrs. Usha wife of the Opposite Party who was the promoter of the said Township. The plot No.157 was purchased by the complainant by way of a sale deed dated 23.06.2010. Thereafter, the complainant entered into a Builder's Agreement with the Opposite Party on 29.06.2010 wherein, the Opposite Party had undertaken to construct a house in the said property within a period of 8 months from 29.06.2010. A sum of Rs.13.50 lakhs has been paid by the complainant to the Opposite Party. However, "Bhoomi Pooja" was done only on 20.08.2010. The Opposite Party was dragging the matter without putting up construction. Thereafter, on 30.05.2014 a letter has been sent by the Opposite Party to the complainant's father, the power agent permitting the complainant to carry out the construction on her own and promising to extend all help from their side. The complainant waited for four years to get the Opposite Party to put up the construction, finally construction has not been put up by the Opposite Party. Thus, the complaint has been laid with a proper notice to the Opposite Party.
3. Though the Opposite Party has been served, they have not chosen to appear before this Commission and hence, the Opposite Party was set ex parte.
4. On behalf of the complainant, Exs.C1 to C6 have been filed and marked. None examined on the side of the complainant.
5. On the basis of the pleadings referred in the complaint and also basing on the documents referred to above, we have heard the learned Counsel appearing for the complainant.
6. The points for consideration that have to be decided are set out hereunder:
1. Whether the complainant is a consumer as defined under the Consumer Protection Act?
2. Whether there is any deficiency of service on the part of the Opposite Party so as to make him liable to pay the amounts claimed in the complaint?
7. As far as the first point is concerned, it is not in dispute that the complainant entrusted with the Opposite Party for construction of a building as per the agreement entered into between them on 29.06.2010 under Ex.C2. It is also not disputed that by a letter dated 30.05.2014 under Ex.C3, the Opposite Party has stated that the construction can be put up by the complainant and that they have no objection for the same. This will clearly prove that the Opposite party having undertaken to put up a construction for the complainant, has failed to do so. After four years, the Opposite party intimated the complainant to put up construction on her own. Thus, in our considered view, the complainant is a Consumer as defined under the Consumer Protection Act.
8. The next issue that has to be considered is whether the complainant is entitled to the amounts claimed in the complaint.
As stated already, the complainant entered into a builder's agreement with the Opposite Party on 29.06.2010 as per Ex.C2. Thereafter, only on 30.05.2014 under Ex.C3 the Opposite Party has permitted the complainant to put up construction on her own. It is the case of the complainant that she has paid a sum of Rs.13.50 lakhs to the Opposite Party as advance to put up the construction. Though in the agreement Ex.C2 there is no mention about the payment of the said amount, the complainant filed Ex.C6 his bank statement which shows that the complainant has paid a sum of Rs.13.50 lakhs to the Opposite Party on 25.06.2010. To deny the said aspect, the Opposite Party has not chosen to appear before this Commission and disputed the payment of the said amount paid by the complainant to the Opposite Party. In fact, the complainant sent Ex.C4 notice to the Opposite Party wherein, it has been specifically stated that the complainant has paid a sum of Rs.13.50 lakhs by way of cheque bearing No. 169294 dated 23.06.2010 drawn in KVB, Pondicherry and the same was cleared on 25.06.2010 in the account of the Opposite Party. The Opposite Party has not chosen to reply for the said notice. This statement made in the notice is corroborated under Ex.C6, the bank statements. Therefore, we have no other option but to agree with the claim made by the complainant that a sum of Rs.13.50 lakhs was advanced by the complainant to the Opposite Party which was credited in the account of the Opposite Party. When that is the position, the Opposite Party has to return the said amount received from the complainant. Thus, we hold that the Opposite Party is liable to pay the sum of Rs.13.50 lakhs to the complainant.
9. The next thing that has to be seen is whether the said amount shall carry any interest, if so, what is the rate of interest. The Opposite Party having received the said amount was kept quiet for about 4 years without putting up construction and hence, the Opposite Party shall be liable to pay an interest of 12% per annum from the date of receipt of the said amount till the payment of the same to the complainant. This will be just and reasonable interest that could be awarded.
10. As far as the compensation for mental agony is concerned, we are of the view that we have awarded a reasonable interest for the amount paid by the complainant to the Opposite Party, hence, a sum of Rs.15,000/- would be just and reasonable to award compensation payable by the Opposite Party to the complainant. Thus, we have ordered a sum of Rs.15,000/- as compensation for mental agony and loss of revenue faced by the complainant.
11. As regards the cost is concerned, it cannot be disputed that the complainant would have spent a considerable amount for fighting this litigation. Though the complainant would have incurred more than what has been claimed by her, we are of the view that since the complainant herself has claimed a sum of Rs.25,000/- towards the cost, we have no other option but to order the same towards the cost of this complaint to the complainant.
12. In fine, the complaint stands allowed and the Opposite Party is directed :-
- To pay a sum of Rs.13,50,000/- paid by the complainant to the Opposite Party;
- The said amount shall carry interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of payment viz., 29.06.2010 till the date of payment;
- The Opposite Party is also liable to pay a sum of Rs.15,000/- towards compensation for mental agony and loss of revenue;
- The Opposite Party shall also pay a sum of Rs.25,000/- towards the cost of this complaint.
The complaint is thus ordered accordingly.
Dated this the 5th day of November, 2015.
(Justice K.VENKATARAMAN)
PRESIDENT
(K.K.RITHA)
MEMBER
(S.TIROUGNANASSAMBANDANE)
MEMBER
LIST OF COMPLAINANT'S WITNESSES: NIL
LIST OF COMPLAINANT'S EXHIBITS:
Ex.C1 – Xerox copy of Sale deed dated 23.06.2010 executed by G. Vijayalatha to and
in favour of M. Usha.
Ex.C2 – Xerox copy of Builder's agreement dated 29.06.2010 between Navasakthi
Townships Developers Private Limited and G. Vijayalatha
Ex.C3 – Copy of permission letter given by Opposite Party to the complainant dated
30.05.2014
Ex.C4 – Office copy of Legal notice dated 22.12.2014 issued by Counsel for the
complainant to the Opposite Party.
Ex.C5 – Copy of Proof of delivery (Acknowledgement card) for the issuance of legal
notice dated 31.12.2014
Ex.C6 – Statement of Accounts of S. Gunaseelan, husband of the complainant issued
by Karur Vysya Bank, Pondicherry for the period from 01.01.2010 to
30.06.2010
LIST OF OPPOSITE PARTY'S WITNESSES: -NIL-
LIST OF OPPOSITE PARTY'S EXHIBITS: -NIL-
(Justice K.VENKATARAMAN)
PRESIDENT
(K.K.RITHA)
MEMBER
(S.TIROUGNANASSAMBANDANE)
MEMBER
