Before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Rohtak.
Complaint No. : 169
Instituted on : 08.03.2021
Decided on : 14.08.2023
Meena Dalal age (61 years) w/o Sh. Amarpal Singh R/o H.No. 95, Type-II, M.D.U. Campus, Rohtak.
………..Complainant.
Vs.
- Omaxe Limited, Omaxe House, 7, Local Shopping Centre, Kalka Ji, New Delhi-110019, through its CMD.
- Omaxe Ltd.,(Omaxe Happy Homes-II Rohtak) situated at Jhajjar Road, Rohtak through its Manager/Authorized Person.
- Subhash Chander, Dealer(Omaxe Happy Homes-II, Rohtak) situated at Jhajjar Road, Rohtak. …….Opposite parties.
COMPLAINT U/S 35 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,2019.
BEFORE: SH.NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT.
DR. TRIPTI PANNU, MEMBER.
DR.VIJENDER SINGH, MEMBER.
Argued: Sh. Pardeep Mittal, Advocate for complainant.
Sh. Mannu Malik, Advocate for opposite parties No. 1 & 2.
Opposite party no. 3 given up.
ORDER
TRIPTI PANNU MEMBER:
1 Brief facts of the case as per complainant are that on 23.11.2013, she had applied for purchase of a residential flat in project Happy Home II Rohtak under registration code HHR/19 with the opposite parties. On the same day she deposited an amount of Rs.4,00,000/- to the opposite parties through Cheque/DD No.505303 dated 12.11.2013 drawn on State Bank of India vide receipt ID No.1014730 and invoice No.102-178627. It was assured by the opposite parties that they will provide possession of flat till December 2019 but neither they provided possession nor any types of construction work has been done at site till the filing of the complaint. Moreover, the opposite parties had demolished the demo flat. The complainant requested the opposite parties many a times verbally and in writing with regard to refund of registration amount alongwith interest but the opposite parties did not pay any heed towards the genuine request of complainant. It is further submitted that on 15.07.2020, the complainant sent an email to opposite parties to refund the amount but they did not reply the same. She also sent a letter dated 04.09.2020 through registered post but till date the opposite parties has not refunded the alleged amount. The act of opposite parties is illegal and amounts to deficiency in service. Hence this complaint and it is prayed that opposite parties may kindly be directed to refund Rs.4,00,000/- i.e. booking amount of flat in question to the complainant alongwith interest @ 18% per annum w.e.f. 23.11.2013 till actual realization, Rs.50,000/- as compensation on account of mental agony and harassment and also to pay Rs.32,000/- on account of litigation expenses to the complainant.
2. After registration of complaint, notice was issued to the opposite parties. Opposite parties No.1 & 2 in preliminary objections of their reply has submitted that complainant is merely an investor who has invested in many properties of respondent in order to earn profit by selling it to market. On merits it is submitted that after going through the tentative plans and agreeing to the terms and conditions, the complainant through a property agent voluntarily got herself registered with the opposite party for booking of a residential unit in the upcoming project of opposite parties. It is denied that opposite parties assured the complainant that the possession of the unit will be handed over till December 2019. The development and construction was to be commenced after receipt of approval with respect to building plans from the concerned competent authority and the complainant was duly informed about the same. The complainant was also informed at the time of registration that plans and designs of the project were purely tentative subject to approval by the concerned authorities. It is denied that complainant is facing great hardship due to not refund of money pertaining to flat. The complainant is merely an investor who has invested in a real estate project in order to earn profit and now due to adverse market conditions filed the present complaint. That there is no deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties and it is prayed that complaint may kindly be dismissed against the opposite parties. Opposite party no. 3 was given up by complainant vide separate statement dated 05.04.2022.
3. Ld. counsel for the complainant in his evidence has tendered affidavit Ex.CW1/A, document Ex.C1 to Ex.C7 and has closed his evidence on dated 25.08.2022. Ld. counsel for the opposite parties No. 1 & 2 in his evidence has tendered affidavit Ex.RW1/A. Perusal of the file reveals that opposite party no.1 & 2 has availed several opportunities including last opportunity to file the remaining evidence. As such evidence of opposite party No.1 & 2 is hereby closed by order dated 11.08.2023 of this Commission.
4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through material aspects of the case very carefully.
5. After going through the file and hearing the parties it is observed that the objection as to commercial purpose was taken by the opposite parties in their written statement but opposite parties failed to place any cogent evidence or material which could prove that the flat was purchased for commercial purpose. As per receipt Ex.C2, an amount of Rs.4,00,000/- has been deposited by the complainant towards registration amount of flat to the opposite parties. The contention of ld. counsel for the complainant is that opposite party company breached the terms of agreement and has not started the construction work at site. The payment was made by the complainant in the year 2013 and thereafter neither any correspondence regarding the construction of unit was made by the complainant nor the amount has been refunded to the complainant. As such there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties and the opposite parties are liable to refund the amount alongwith interest and compensation to the complainant.
7. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, we hereby allow the complaint and we hereby direct the opposite parties to refund the amount of Rs.4,00,000/-(Rupees Four Lacs only) alongwith interest @ 12% p.a. from the date of payment to the opposite parties till its realization and shall also pay a sum of Rs.25000/-(Rupees twenty five thousand only) as compensation on account of deficiency in service and Rs.5000/-(Rupees five thousand only) as litigation expenses to the complainant within one month from the date of decision.
8. Copy of this order be supplied to both the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.
Announced in open court:
14.08.2023
................................................
Nagender Singh Kadian, President
……………………………
Tripti Pannu, Member
.....................................................
Vijender Singh, Member.
