Tamil Nadu

StateCommission

CC/135/2014

V. ASHOK VEERARAGAVAN AND JAISHREE CHANDRASEKAR - Complainant(s)

Versus

NEW CHENNAI TOWNSHIP PRIVATE LIMITED, CHAIRMAN AND ,MANAGING DIRECTOR - Opp.Party(s)

B. CHERAN

10 Dec 2021

ORDER

IN THE STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHENNAI

  Present:    HON’BLE THIRU.JUSTICE.R.SUBBIAH  ,             ::  PRESIDENT

                    TMT. Dr.S.M.LATHA MAHESWARI                         ::   MEMBER

DATED, THE 10^th  DAY OF DECEMBER 2021

C.C.No.135 /2014

1. Mr. A. Ashok Veeraragavan,

  S/o. Late Dr. T.Veeraragavan,

2. Mrs. Jaishree Chandrasekar,

   D/o. Mr. V. Chandra Sekaran,

Both complainants are husband and wife and resides at:-

 

Apartment No.4302, West Heights 1, Executive Towers,

Business Bay, Dubai –UAE, Post Box No.31698,

Dubai –UAE,

 

Both are represented by their Authorized agent by a deed of power of Attorney filed herewith:

 

Mr. Rajasekar Gorantla,

S/o. Mr. G. Sudhakar,

J Block No.63, 13^th Main Road

Anna Nagar,

Chennai – 600 040.                                                                               .. Complainants

                                                       -Versus-

New Chennai Township Private Limited,

(A wholly owned subsidiary of MARG Limited)

Rep. by its Chairman and Managing Director,

Reg. Office No.4/318,

Old Mahabalipuram Road,

Kottivakkam,

Chennai – 600 041.                                                                      .. Opposite party

 

Counsel for complainant                           : M/s. Dr. B. Cheran & M. Nagarathinam

Counsel for opposite parties                     : M/s. B.R. Shankaralingam

ORDER

 Dr. S.M. LATHA MAHESWARI   : MEMBER

          The complaint was filed by the complainant alleging deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party along with a prayer to direct the opposite party to refund the advance amount of Rs.15,00,000/- and to pay interest @ 8% from the date of booking till cancellation and @ 15% from cancellation till realization, Rs.1,22,671/-, on account of forex loss Rs.1,55,537/- , Rs.10,000/- towards advocate fees  along with compensation of Rs.6 lakhs for mental agony, and Rs.20,000/- towards the cost of the proceedings.

1.        Brief facts necessitating the filing of complaint:

          The complainants who are husband and wife residing in Dubai represented by  the power agent Mr. Rajasekar Gorantla had filed the present complaint. The complainants alleged that lured by the innumerable advertisements made in media by the developer/ opposite party with regard to the Project in Royal orchard / Tapavan project located at Thiruvathoor Village, Cheyur Taluk, Kancheepuram District had decided to by one Villa and land in the said project. It was represented that the promoter at that time had obtained permission from the concerned authorities to develop a gated community consisting  of 100 villas. The complainant was allotted villa No.43 and plot No.44 at the cost of Rs.1 Crore.  On 22.08.2012 Rs.15,00,000/- was paid by the complainant to the opposite party for which  proper receipt was issued by them. There was several email correspondences between the parties with regard to the progress of the construction of the villa. Though  promise was made by the opposite party that it would deliver the villa in June 2013 , they even failed to  get the necessary approvals from the authorities till September 2013. The complainants losing hope and interest in the project had  decided to cancel the booking and sent a cancellation Notice on 13.09.2013 which was accepted by the opposite party by an email dated 28.09.2013. For return of the advance amount paid  by the complainant there were several meetings between the parties.  The complainants sent a legal notice dated 10.03.2014 calling upon the opposite party with regard to the deficiency in service committed by them in not refunding the advance amount. The complainant states that though the opposite party had accepted the cancellation and had offered to close the refund process within 90 days, till the date of filing of complaint no amount was paid. The complainants also alleged forex loss workings. Thus the present complaint was filed for the refund of the money invested by them with the opposite party as they were not interested in any other alternate property as offered by the opposite party.

2.       The opposite party filed  version stating that the complainants had paid the initial booking amount only after knowing fully that the necessary approvals were pending before the authorities and the building approval was yet to be obtained. They also cited force majeure clause for the delay. They dispute the Consumer Jural Relationship between the parties. They further submitted that the process was getting delayed only due to bonafide reasons and therefore there was no deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on their part. The complainant filed proof affidavit and marked documents  Ex.A1 to Ex.A20. The opposite parties filed proof affidavit but no document was filed on their side.

3.        Points for consideration:

1. Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party as alleged by the complainants?
2. If so to what relief the complainant is entitled?

4.        Point No.1

Admitted facts:

1. That the copy of Power of attorney dated 10.07.2014  was marked as Ex.A1;
2. That the copy of offer document dated 06.08.2012 was marked as Ex.A2;
3. That the copy of Receipts dated 30.08.2012 and 22.10.2012 issued by opposite party was marked as Ex.A3;
4. That the copy of E-mail correspondence with regard to change of villa number dated 24.08.2012 was marked as Ex.A4;
5. That the copy of correspondence with the HDFC Bank with regard to approval of the project dated 26.08.2012  was marked as Ex.A5;
6. That the copy of e-mail by the opposite party  dated 26.08.2012 was marked as Ex.A6;
7. That the copy of E-mail sent by the complainant’s asking for the approval process time dated 26.08.2012  was marked as Ex.A7
8. The the copy of E-mail by the  opposite party  dated 26.08.2012 was marked as Ex.A8;
9. That the copy of email by the opposite party reverting back to the complainants regarding the time schedule dated 10.09.2012 was marked as Ex.A9;
10. That the copy of E-mail by the opposite party with regard to status update dated 12.04.2013 was marked as Ex.A10;
11. That the copy of E-mail by the complainants with regard to the cancellation dated 13.09.2013 was marked as Ex.A11;
12. That the copy of E-mail the opposite party acknowledged the mail dated 28.09.2013 was marked as Ex.A12;
13. That the  copy of E-mail by the complainants requesting the opposite party to process refund the claim at the earliest dated 28.09.2013 was marked as Ex.A13;
14. That the copy of communication chart from 23.10.2013 to 10.02.2014 was marked as Ex.A14,
15. That the copy of the E-mail – by the opposite party requesting time to refund dated 06.01.2014  was marked as Ex.A15;
16. That the copy of legal notice issued by the complainants dated 10.03.2014 was marked as Ex.A16;
17. That the copy of Reply dated 09.04.2014 issued by the opposite party was marked as Ex.A17;
18. That the copy of second legal Notice issued dated 23.04.2014 by the complainants was marked as Ex.A18;
19. That the copy of calculation of claim amount was marked as Ex.A19;
20. That the Copy of Minutes of the meeting dt.08.11.2012 was marked as Ex.A20.

Heard the counsel for complainant and perused the written arguments filed by both parties. However the counsel for the opposite party did not appear to submit oral arguments. The complainant lured by the Advertisements made by the opposite party in various media had decided to purchase one villa and land in the project named “Royal Orchard” / Tapovan project located at Thiruvathoor village, Cheyur Taluk, Kancheepuram District. It is represented that the promoter had already obtained permission from the concerned authorities and on 22.08.2012 the complainant made an advance payment of Rs.15,00,000/- to the bank account as provided by the opposite party for which the opposite party had issued valid receipt. Thereafter, transactions and correspondence between the parties were only through emails and by an email dated 24.08.2012 the opposite party changed the villa and plot No.53 and 52 to villa No.43 and plot No.44 respectively. It is submitted by the complainant that whenever they questioned about the progress of the project the opposite party cited various illogical reasons that the permission from the authorities were awaited. Thus the opposite party failed to fulfill their promise by handing over the project within the time frame as promised by them several times. The complainant thus lost interest in the above project and sent a cancellation notice on 13.09.2013 which was accepted by the opposite party by email dated 28.09.2013 and also assured that the cancellation process including the refund of the amount will be over within 90 days. However the opposite party did not keep up its words. The opposite party though offered alternate project the complainant was not interested in the same. The opposite party finally requested for 3 months additional time to refund the amount i.e., by 1^st week of April 2014. But till date the opposite party has not refunded even a single rupee to the complainant. On hearing the counsel for the complainant though the opposite party cited various reasons for the delay in the project that the permission from the authorities were not issued in time and due to force majeur reasons the project could not be completed we are of the considered opinion that the opposite party having accepted a substantial amount of Rs.15,00,000/- from the complainant as early as in 2012 and retaining the said amount for a long period and also not completing the project and handing over the same to the complainant as promised clearly amounts to deficiency in service and they had enriched themselves illegally. It is a clear unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite party to accept the amounts without even getting the necessary permission from the concerned authorities and requesting the complainants to accept for alternate project. Thus we hold that the opposite parties had committed clear deficiency in service and unfair trade practice and we answer point No.1 in favour of the complainant and as against opposite party.

5.        Point No.2:-

As we have come to the conclusion that the opposite party has committed deficiency in service and unfair trade practice, the complainant should be compensated in terms of money. It is evident as per the receipts Ex.A.3, issued by the opposite party that they have received Rs.15,00,000/-  from the complainant on 22.08.2012 and retained the same for long period. Thus complainant is entitled for refund of the said amount, further he is also entitled to a compensation of Rs. 2 lakhs for mental agony and hardship. The complainant is also entitled for interest at the rate of 18% on the amount paid to the opposite parties from the date of complaint till realization. Though the complainant had prayed for compensation on account of forex loss, the same was not proved by adequate documents. Hence we are of the view that the complainant is not entitled for any compensation towards the said category. We also award cost of Rs.10,000/- to the complainant towards litigation cost. Thus we answer point No.2 in favour of the complainants.

          In the result, the complaint is partly allowed as follows :-

1. The opposite parties shall refund the amount of Rs. 15,00,000/- with 18% interest from the date of complaint till realization;
2. Compensation of Rs.2 lakhs for the mental agony & hardship;
3. Cost of Rs.10,000/-   towards litigation expenses. 

 

 

S.M.LATHA MAHESWARI                                                                         R. SUBBIAH             

          MEMBER                                                                                          PRESIDENT

 

List of Documents filled by the Complainants   

                                               

     Ex.A1                     10.07.2014       Copy of Power of Attorney

 Ex.A2           06.08.2012         Copy of offer Document

                            

 

 Ex.A3           30.11.2012         Copy of Receipts issued by Opposite party

Ex.A.4           24.08.2012         Copy of E-Mail – Change of Villa

Ex.A.5           26.08.2012          Copy of E-mail – whether the project was approved by HDFC    

                                               Bank

 

Ex.A.6           26.08.2012          Copy of E-mail – the opposite party reply

Ex.A.7           26.08.2012          Copy of E-mail – the complainants asked for the approval    

                                                process time 

Ex.A.8           26.08.2012          Copy of E-mail – the opposite party reply

Ex.A.9           10.09.2012          Copy of E-mail – the opposite party reverted back to the

                                            Complainants regarding the time schedule.

Ex.A.10         12.04.2013         Copy of E-mail – the status update

Ex.A.11         13.09.2013         Copy of E-mail – the complainant sent a cancellation notice.

Ex.A.12         28.09.2013         Copy of E-mail – the opposite party acknowledged the mail

Ex.A.13         28.09.2013         Copy of E-mail the complainants requested the opposite party

                                            To process the claim at the earliest

Ex.A.14         23.10.2013         Copy of communication chart

                        To

                   06.01.2014       

Ex.A.15         06.01.2014         Copy of E-mail – the Opposite party requesting time

Ex.A.16         10.03.2014         Copy of Legal Notice issued by the complainants

Ex.A.17         09.04.2014         Copy of Reply issued by the opposite party

Ex.A.18         23.04.2014         Copy of second Legal Notice issued by the complainants

Ex.A.19             -                   Copy of Calculation of claim amount.

Ex.A20           08.11.2012          Copy of Minutes of the meeting

 

Opposite party Documents :  NIL   

 

 

S.M.LATHA MAHESWARI                                                                            R. SUBBIAH             

          MEMBER                                                                                            PRESIDENT