Haryana

Sonipat

CC/108/2016

Arvind nain S/o B.S. Nain - Complainant(s)

Versus

Parasvnath Developers Limited - Opp.Party(s)

Mannu Malik

20 Jan 2017

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,

SONEPAT.

               

 

                                Complaint No.108 of 2016                                             Instituted on:12.04.2016

                                Date of order:20.01.2017

 

1.Arvind Nain 2. Arun Nain son of Col. BS Nain, both residents of H.No.130, Sector 15, HUDA Sonepat.

…Complainants.        

Versus

 

1.M/s Parsvnath Developers Ltd. Regd. & Corporate office 6^th Floor, Arunachal Building, 19 Barakhamba road, New Delhi-01 through its Chairman/MD.

2.Branch Manager, Parsvnath Developers Ltd., Sonepat, distt. Sonepat.

 

                                                     …Respondents.

 

 

COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 12 OF

THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,1986

 

Argued by: Sh.Mannu Malik  Advocate for complainant.

           Sh.Pankaj Rohila   Advocate for respondents.

 

Before-    Nagender Singh-President.

Prabha Wati-Member.

J.L. Gupta-Member.

 

O R D E R

 

          Complainants have filed the present complaint against the respondents alleging therein that they have booked one shop/show room with the respondents in their Parsvnath Mall in Parsvnath City, Commercial Complex, Sonepat and have deposited Rs.18,27,250/- with the respondents from time to time.  Shop/showroom no.GF-51 was allotted by the respondents in Parsvnath Mall.  The said shop was booked by the complainants for earning their livelihood.  As per agreement, the respondents were required to deliver the possession of the shop/show room duly completed in all respects to the complainants within a period of 30 months from the commencement of the construction of the Mall. But the construction was stopped by the respondents.  The respondents suggested and requested the complainants for the change of the site of shop no.GF-51 to GF-29 on the ground floor with the area of 723 sq. feet. The complainants agreed, but the respondent instead of modifying the agreement, made some corrections in the existing agreement.  Now a period of more-than 9 years have passed and the complainant have requested the respondents to complete the construction and to deliver the possession of the shop to the complainants, but of no use. So, the respondents are liable to pay compensation at the rate of Rs.107.64 paise per sq. meters i.e. Rs.10/- per sq. feet of the super area i.e. 723 sq. feet of the shop per month for the period of delay i.e. after the expiry of 36 months from the date of bhoomi pujan of the shop.  The construction work of the Mall in question still lying stopped.  The complainants have also requested the respondents to refund the entire deposited amount of Rs.1827250/- alongwith interest to the complainants, but of no use and that amounts to a grave deficiency in service on the part of the respondents. So, they have come to this Forum and has filed the present complaint.

2.        The respondents appeared and they filed their joint written statement submitting therein that the complainants have booked a shop no.GF-51 measuring 908 sq. feet with the respondents.  The shop buyer agreement was executed between the complainants and the respondents.  The complainants opted for construction linked payment plan.  The complainants are the defaulters in making payment towards the installment of the shop.  The complainants vide letter dated 18.7.2011 requested the respondents to shift the allotment of shop form GF-51 to GF-29 which was allowed by the respondents.  The construction of the shop was to be completed within 36 months from the start of construction plus grade period of 36 months.    Though the construction of the shop commenced, but due to global recession which is beyond the control of the respondents, the construction got delayed.  So, the complainants are not entitled to claim compensation or damages from the respondents in terms of clause 10(a) of the Agreement.  The respondents are governed by the terms and conditions of the agreement which provides under clause 10(d) that in case of delay, the complainants shall be entitled to compensation at the rate of Rs.107.64 per sq. meter i.e. Rs.10/- per sq. feet of the super area of the shop per month for the period of delay.  The complainants are making false allegations against the respondents with ulterior motive to earn wrongful benefit from the respondents.  There is no deficiency in service of any kind on the part of the respondents and thus, the complainants are not entitled for any relief & compensation and prayed for the dismissal of the present complaint.

3.        We have heard the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for both the parties at length.  All the documents have been perused very carefully and minutely.

          Ld. Counsel for the complainant has submitted that the complainants have booked one shop/show room with the respondents in their Parsvnath Mall in Parsvnath City, Commercial Complex, Sonepat and have deposited Rs.18,27,250/- with the respondents from time to time.  Shop/showroom no.GF-51 was allotted by the respondents in Parsvnath Mall.  The said shop was booked by the complainants for earning their livelihood.  As per agreement, the respondents were required to deliver the possession of the shop/show room duly completed in all respects to the complainants within a period of 30 months from the commencement of the construction of the Mall. But the construction was stopped by the respondents.  The respondents suggested and requested the complainants for the change of the site of shop no.GF-51 to GF-29 on the ground floor with the area of 723 sq. feet. The complainants agreed, but the respondent instead of modifying the agreement, made some corrections in the existing agreement.  Now a period of more-than 9 years have passed and the complainant have requested the respondents to complete the construction and to deliver the possession of the shop to the complainants, but of no use. So, the respondents are liable to pay compensation at the rate of Rs.107.64 paise per sq. meters i.e. Rs.10/- per sq. feet of the super area i.e. 723 sq. feet of the shop per month for the period of delay i.e. after the expiry of 36 months from the date of bhoomi pujan of the shop.  The construction work of the Mall in question still lying stopped.  The complainants have also requested the respondents to refund the entire deposited amount of Rs.1827250/- alongwith interest to the complainants, but of no use and that amounts to a grave deficiency in service on the part of the respondents.

          Ld. Counsel for the respondents has submitted that the complainants have booked a shop no.GF-51 measuring 908 sq. feet with the respondents.  The shop buyer agreement was executed between the complainants and the respondents.  The complainants opted for construction linked payment plan.  The complainants are the defaulters in making payment towards the installment of the shop.  The complainants vide letter dated 18.7.2011 requested the respondents to shift the allotment of shop form GF-51 to GF-29 which was allowed by the respondents.  The construction of the shop was to be completed within 36 months from the start of construction plus grade period of 36 months.    Though the construction of the shop commenced, but due to global recession which is beyond the control of the respondents, the construction got delayed.  So, the complainants are not entitled to claim compensation or damages from the respondents in terms of clause 10(a) of the Agreement.  The respondents are governed by the terms and conditions of the agreement which provides under clause 10(d) that in case of delay, the complainants shall be entitled to compensation at the rate of Rs.107.64 per sq. meter i.e. Rs.10/- per sq. feet of the super area of the shop per month for the period of delay.  The complainants are making false allegations against the respondents with ulterior motive to earn wrongful benefit from the respondents.  There is no deficiency in service of any kind on the part of the respondents and thus, the complainants are not entitled for any relief & compensation and prayed for the dismissal of the present complaint.

          In the present case, it is admitted by the respondents that the construction of the shop commenced, but due to global recession which is beyond the control of the respondents, the construction got delayed.  In our view, self admission is the best evidence and there is no need to rebut the same.  There is no dispute with regard to the fact that the complainants have booked the shop in question with the respondents and have deposited huge amount with the respondents.  The shop was booked by the respondents on 16.5.2007 and as per the agreement, the respondents were required to deliver the possession of the shop within 36 months including grace period i.e. upto 16.5.2010.  But the respondents have failed to deliver the possession of the shop in question to the complainants.

         In our view, the complainant is definitely entitled to get some sort of relief from the respondents. The complainant has pleaded that he has deposited huge amount of Rs.18,27,250/- with the respondents and the said amount is being utilized by the respondents for their personal gain.  Thus, in our view, the ends of justice would be fully met if some directions are given to the respondents to refund the entire deposited amount to the complainant. Thus, we hereby direct the respondents to refund the entire deposited amount to the complainant alongwith interest at the rate of 10% per annum from the date of its respective deposit till its realization.

         With these observations, findings and directions, the present complaint stands allowed.

         Certified copy of this order be provided to both the parties free of cost. File be consigned after due compliance.

 

 

(Prabha Wati)(J.L.Gupta)                   (Nagender Singh-President)

Member DCDRF  Member DCDRF                   DCDRF, Sonepat.

 

Announced:20.01.2017