Judgment : Dt.22.9.2017

Shri S. K. Verma, President.

            This is a complaint made by one Motior Rahaman Molla, Vill-Mouzpur, P.O.-Ramakanta Nagar, P.S.-Mandirbajar, Dist.-24 Pgs(S), PIN-743 395 against Nestwood Estates Pvt. Ltd., Office space No.306, 3^rd floor, P.S.-IXL-Block A, Atghora, New Town, Salt Lake City, Dist.-24 Pgs(N), W.B.-700 136, OP No.1 and Skywood Developers Pvt. Ltd., 325, New Alipore, B Block, Kolkata-700 053 praying for a direction upon the OPs to refund booking money of Rs.1,00,000/- with interest of 12% p.a. and for compensation of Rs.50,000/- and litigation cost.

            Facts in brief are that Complainant booked one flat with the project of Sanhita with the OPs for a price of Rs.2,00,000/-, out of which Complainant paid Rs.1,40,000/-. But the project was not approved and so Complainant took back Rs.1,40,000/-. Again, Complainant booked a flat in the 2^nd time that OP No.1 and paid Rs.1,00,000/- by the cheque No.13400. OP No.1 and OP No.2 are in joint venture. Complainant booked a flat with OP No.1 and paid Rs.1,00,000/- to OP No.1. Complainant has further stated that by letter dt.29.5.2015, Complainant requested the OP expressing his inability to purchase the flat and asked for refund of the booking money. OPs by letter dt.11.7.2015 expressed that in case Complainant decides to withdraw and requests for refund of the money the OP would arrange the same for the Complainant after 15.8.2015 as per stipulation Complainant wrote 3^rd letter asking for refund. Complainant also asked Rs.10,000/- on account expenses of preparation of documents. But, subsequently, Complainant relinquished the demand. Complainant was under treatment since 27.1.2016. Complainant further has stated that his advocate issued a notice. But, OPs did not refund the money. So, Complainant filed this case.

            OP No.1 did not contest the case by filing written version and so the case is heard ex-parte against it.

            OP No.1 filed written version and denied the allegations of the complaint. With this denials OP No.1 has prayed for dismissal of the complaint. OP No.2 did not contest the case by filing written version and so the case is heard ex-parte against OP No.2.

Decision with reasons

Complainant filed affidavit-in-chief to which OP No.1 filed questionnaire. Thereafter Complainant did not file affidavit-in-reply and OP also did not file evidence.

            Main point for determination is whether Complainant is entitled to the reliefs as prayed for.

            On perusal of the prayer portion of the complaint, it appears that Complainant prayed for refund of Rs.1,00,000/-. Further, on perusal of the order No.10 dt.21.4.2017, it appears that this Forum disposed of the complaint where Complainant had prayed for refund of Rs.90,000/-. It is also clear from this order, Complainant was agreeable to accept Rs.90,000/-. But, OP was ready to refund Rs.87,303/- by two installments to the Complainant. If that be so, we find that OPs be directed to refund Rs.87,303/-, the object of the justice would be served. Of course, Complainant was compelled to file this case and so he is entitled to compensation of Rs.5,000/- with litigation cost of Rs.2,000/-.

            Hence,

ordered

            CC/610/2016 and the same is allowed in part on contest. OPs are directed to refund Rs.87,303/- to the Complainant within three months, in default the amount shall carry interest of 10% p.a. In addition, OPs are directed to pay Rs.7,000/- to the Complainant as compensation and litigation cost within this period, otherwise this amount shall carry interest @ 10% p.a.