Delhi

East Delhi

CC/463/2014

AMIT - Complainant(s)

Versus

PANSAV NATH - Opp.Party(s)

04 Apr 2018

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM (EAST)

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

CONVENIENT SHOPPING CENTRE, FIRST FLOOR,

SAINI ENCLAVE, DELHI – 110 092

 

C.C. NO. 463/14

 

Shri Amit Mehta

S/o Krishan Kumar Mehta

R/o Mehta Niwas, Near Punjabi Dharamshala

Rewari, Haryana – 1`23 401                                        ….Complainant

 

Vs.

             

1. M/s. Parsvanath Developers Limited.

Ddelhi Off: 6^th Floor, Arunachal Building

19, Barakhamba Road

New Delhi – 110 001

 

2. Corp. Office: Parsvanath Seelampur Metro Mall

G.T. Road, Seelampur Colony

Shahdara                                                                        …Opponent

 

Date of Institution: 16.05.2014

Judgement Reserved on: 04.04.2018

Judgement Passed on: 05.04.2018

 

CORUM:

Sh. Sukhdev Singh (President)

Dr. P.N. Tiwari (Member)

Ms. Harpreet Kaur Charya (Member)

 

Order By: Sh. Sukhdev Singh (President)

 

JUDGEMENT

            This complaint has been filed by Shri Amit Mehta against M/s. Parsvanath Developers Limited (OP) under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 with allegations of unfair trade practice and deficiency in service. 

2.         The facts in brief are that the complainant Amit Mehta alongwith his cousin Varun Kalra booked a residential plot of 172 sq. yds.@ Rs. 5,400/- per sq. yd. with respondents vide letter dated 31.12.2007 in the project “Parsvanath City, Indore”.  They applied for the advance registration and deposited 15% of the total value amount of Rs. 1,39,320/- through cheque no. 242964 dated 31.12.2007, drawn on ICICI Bank for which receipt no. S0064883 was issued.  They paid further installments (50% of the total value) through following cheques

Cheque no.         Dated                         Amount

488832                 29.01.2008                43,840/-

242965                 29.01.2008                49,040/-

488833                 05.03.2008                46,440/-

237718                 05.03.2008                46,440/-

237721                 16.05.2008                46,880/-

194847                 16.05.2008                46,000/-

242967                 10.08.2008                46,440/-

488830                 22.09.2008                46,440/-

242972                 27.01.2009                46,440/-

488836                 27.01.2009                46,440/-

 

Thus, they have paid 65% of the total value of the plot.  They approached respondent no. 1 regarding development of the project, but they were not informed.  The complainant also visited the site on October 2011 and came to know that the plot was not constructed in the allotted place. 

            Since the complainant did not get the satisfactory reply, they sent an email of dated 09.05.2013 intimating to respondent no. 1 regarding his unwillingness to retain the residential plot which was booked by them.  Email of dated 18.06.2013 was also sent.  Both these emails were not replied. 

            Again in April 2014, complainant called Parsvanath office at Shahdara, but he was not given any response.  He again asked for refund of amount on 31.05.2013.  However, they did not give any reply.  Thus, it has been stated that there was deficiency on the part of respondents, who also indulged in unfair trade practice. 

            The complainant have stated that due to this, it has caused mental agony and harassment.  Hence, they have claimed refund amount of Rs.6,03,720/- alongwith 18% interest; Rs. 1,00,000/- compensation on account of harassment and mental agony and Rs. 25,000/- cost of litigation.

3.         In the reply filed on behalf of Parsvanath Developers Limited (OP), they have taken various pleas such as the complaint was time barred; the complaint has been filed just to avoid the court fee and complaint was bound by the Plot Buyer Agreement.  Further, they have denied the other contents of the complaint.

4.         In support of its complaint, the complainant have examined himself.  He has deposed on affidavit.  He has narrated the contents of the complaint.

            In defence, Parsvanath Developers Limited (OP) have examined   Shri Ajay Kashyap, Addl. General Manager of OP, who have deposed on affidavit and reiterated the contents of the reply. 

5.         We have heard Ld. Counsel for the parties and have perused the material placed on record.  It has been argued on behalf of OP that the complaint was time barred.  Further, he has argued that complainant was bound by the Plot Buyer Agreement.

            On the other hand, Ld. Counsel for complainant have argued that the complaint was filed within the limitation and it was not time barred.  Further, he has stated that since the project was not developed by OP, the question of enforcement of Plot Buyer Agreement does not arise.

            If the evidence on record is perused, it is noticed that in the complaint, complainant have stated that they have sent mail on 09.05.2013 and again on 18.06.2013 and visited the office of OP in the month of April 2014 and the complaint has been filed on 16.05.2014, the question of limitation does not arise.

            With regard to Plot Buyer Agreement, this Plot Buyer agreement have not been signed by both the parties.  When both the parties have not signed the agreement, the question of its enforcement does not arise.  Therefore, argument of Ld. Counsel for OP that complainants were bound by the Plot Buyer Agreement have no force.  The fact that complainants have deposited an amount of Rs.6,03,720/- and respondents have failed to deliver the possession within the stipulated time, certainly, there has been deficiency on the part of OP.  By not delivering the possession within the stipulated period, the complainants have suffered mental pain and agony for which they are entitled for the compensation.  We, therefore, order that Parsvanath Developers Limited (OP) shall refund an amount of                Rs. 6,03,720/- with 9% interest from January 2012.  We further award compensation of Rs. 50,000/- which includes the cost of litigation.

            The order be complied within a period of 45 days, if not complied, the amount of compensation shall also carry 9% interest from the date of order. 

          Copy of the order be supplied to the parties as per rules.

            File be consigned to Record Room.

 

(DR. P.N. TIWARI)                                              (HARPREET KAUR CHARYA)

Member                                                                                Member    

 

            (SUKHDEV SINGH)

             President