Punjab

Sangrur

CC/39/2015

Rajinder Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

PACL Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Shri Hatinder Prashar

03 Jun 2015

ORDER

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SANGRUR

                             

                                                                     Complaint no. 39

                                                                      Instituted on:  19.01.2015

                                                                     Decided on:    03.06.2015

 

Rajinder Singh son of Shri Dayal Singh resident of  H.No.720, W.No.3 Guru Nanak Colony, Sangrur.                                                                            …. Complainant.   

                                         Versus

 

1.     PACL Limited, Opp. HDFC Bank, near Goyal Laboratory Dhuri Gate, Sangrur through its Manager.

2.     PACL Limited, 22, 3^rd Floor, Amber Tower Sansar Chand Road, Jaipur through DGM Operation.

3.     PACL Limited 7^th Floor Gopaldas Bhawan, 28 Barakhamba Road, New Delhi through Executive Director.   

      ….Opposite parties.

 

FOR THE COMPLAINANT:    Shri Hatinder Prashar, Advocate                          

 

FOR THE OPP. PARTIES  :     Shri Naresh Juneja, Advocate                     

 

 

Quorum

         

                    Sukhpal Singh Gill, President

K.C.Sharma, Member

Sarita Garg, Member

                                   

ORDER:  

 

Sukhpal Singh Gill, President

 

1.             Rajinder Singh, complainant has preferred the present complaint against the opposite parties (referred to as OPs in short) on the ground that on the request of OPs, he opened an account bearing no. U107175002 for Rs.2000/- per month. Thereafter the complainant deposited Rs.2000/- as second installment on 26.10.2010  and then deposited an amount of Rs.11500/- as installments for six months on 4.3.2011. Thereafter due to some family problem the complainant could not  deposit the further installments. As such the complainant deposited total Rs.15500/- . The complainant requested the OPs so many times to return the money with interest but OPs failed to do so. Thus, alleging deficiency in service on the part of OPs, the complainant has sought following reliefs:- 

i)      OPs be directed to make the payment of Rs.15500/- along with interest @12% per annum till payment,  

ii)     OPs be directed to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs.5000/- as compensation   on account of mental agony, harassment and to pay Rs.1100/- as litigation expenses and also to pay Rs.2200/- as counsel fee.

2.             In reply filed by the OPs, preliminary objections on the grounds of maintainability, jurisdiction and cause of action have been taken up.  It is stated that M/s PACL  Limited is a registered company under the Companies Act 1956 and it is engaged in the real estate business and also in the  business of sale and development of  agricultural land/  plot across  the country and allot the  land to the customer  for which an agreement is executed  between the company and the customer and there is a specific clause in the agreement that any dispute pertaining to the said agreement will be referred to the arbitrator for resolution of the dispute. As such, this Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain and try the present complaint.  On merits, deposit of amount for purchasing the land by the complainant is admitted.  It is submitted that the OPs did not receive any deposit from the complainant and the amount received from the complainant is an advance consideration for purchase of land/plot and the same is received. It is further submitted that due to dispute with SEBI, the account of the OPs has been freezed by CBI  due to which they are unable to release the amount to the complainant.  Thus, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the OPs.

3.             The complainant has tendered documents Ex.C-1 and Ex.C-6 and closed evidence. On the other hand, OPs have tendered document Ex.OP-1 to Ex.OP-2 and closed evidence.

4.             From the perusal of documents placed on the file and after hearing the arguments of the learned counsel for the complainant, we find that the complainant opened an account bearing no. U107175002 for Rs.2000/- per month.     The complainant’s specific case is that  due to some family problem he could not deposit  the amount  of installments till the maturity of the  scheme and  he requested the OP No.1 so many times to return the deposited amount with interest. On the other hand, learned counsel for the OPs has argued that  the complainant deposited the alleged amount with the OPs purchasing the land. The OP  is a registered company under the Companies Act and  engaged in the real estate business and also in the business of sale and development of agriculture land/plot across  the country and allot the land to the customer under certain schemes of Fixed payment plan and installment payment plan etc. for which an agreement  is executed between the company and the customer and there is a specific clause in the agreement that any dispute pertaining to  the said agreement will be referred to the arbitrator for resolution of the dispute.  Second objection of the OPs is that the complainant had deposited the said amount for purchasing the land to the answering respondent. The arguments of the learned counsel for the OPs is not tenable because no such agreement as stated by the learned counsel for the OPs has been placed on record. Further, no document has been produced by the OPs that they have purchased any land for allotment to the complainant.  However, the OPs have produced on record copy of letter of the bank of Baroda Ex.OP-2 in which two current accounts of the Sangrur Branch of the OP had been freezed by the Central Bureau of Investigation, New Delhi, but we feel that with the freeze of accounts, the OPs cannot escape from their liability and same still stands. As such, OPs are liable to return the amount as agreed between the parties.

5.             So, in view of the above discussion, we allow the complaint of the complainant and direct the OPs to make the payment of Rs.15500/-to the complainant along with interest @9% per annum from the date of filing of the complaint till realization. We further order the OPs to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs.3000/- being consolidated amount of compensation. 

6.             This order of ours shall be complied with within 60 days from the receipt of copy of the order.  Copy of the order be supplied to the parties free of charge. File be consigned to records in due course. 

Announced

                June 3, 2015

 

 

 

( Sarita Garg)           ( K.C.Sharma)           (Sukhpal Singh Gill)                                                                                      

Member                 Member                          President

 

 

BBS/-