Delhi

North East

CC/118/2012

Praveen Gautam - Complainant(s)

Versus

Parsvnath Developers Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

23 Jan 2016

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM: NORTH-EAST

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

D.C. OFFICE COMPLEX, NAND NAGRI, DELHI-93

Complaint Case No. 118/12

 

CORAM:  Hon’ble President Sh. N.K. Sharma

                  Hon’ble Member Sh. Nishat Ahmad Alvi

 

In the matter of:

 

Sh. Praveen Gautam

1/4549, Ram Nagar Extension,

Mandoli Road,

Shahdara,

Delhi-110032                                                                          Complainant                                       

     

Versus

 

Parsvnath Developers Ltd.

6^th Floor, Arunachal Building,

19, Barakhamba Road,

New Delhi-110001                                                                  Opposite Party

 

                                                                  DATE OF INSTITUTION: 26-03-2012

                                                                   DATE OF DECISION      :  23-01-2016   

 

Order

 

N.K. Sharma, President:-

Nishat Ahmad Alvi, Member:-

 

1. As per complaint, complainant booked a flat in a prelaunch project of OP namely-Palacia Project in Greater Noida (UP) in the month of June, 2006.  At the time of booking complainant paid Rs.4 lac as booking amount.  Thereafter on formal launch of the project another amount of Rs.4,05,200/- was paid by the complainant on 23-4-07. The said project could not be initiated and completed as per time schedule and even at the time of filing of present complaint, the project is at the initial stage.  Consequently, preferences for booking of the flat in the said project being dissipated, for the delay by Ops in adhering to the construction time schedule, complainant, losing his interest, did not enter into any flat buyer agreement with the OP and requested on phone, a number of times and also vide his letter dated 5-9-10, to the OP, demanding cancellation and refund. OP did not return the money rather asked vide its letter dated 11-9-10 & 28-9-10 for further payments and threatened the complainant to invoke penalty clause of flat buyer agreement, further harassing him.  As per complainant since no flat buyer agreement was executed between the two, he is not bound by the terms and conditions of the same.  In this respect complainant also approached Consumer Grievance Redressal Cell, Department of Consumer Affairs, Government of India. But even after reminders, from Consumer Grievance Redressal Cell, OP instead of remitting outstandings OP replied vide letter dated 22.04.2011 stating that the interest of complainant is duly protected for delay in handing over the possession by way of compensation as per clause 10(c) of flat buyer agreement.  Pleading that OP is deficient in timely delivery of service by not adhering, to the construction time schedule as stipulated, for the said housing project, complainant has alleged that OP has no  right to keep his money forcibly, fraudulently and illegally with it without his consent even while no flat buyer agreement is executed between the two. Complainant has prayed for refund of the deposited amount of Rs.8,05,200/- with due interest alongwith compensation.
2. After notice OP by filing its reply has taken preliminary objections of jurisdiction of this forum, on the grounds that (1) neither, any cause of action arises, nor OP resides or works for gain, within its jurisdiction; (2) subject matter, being recovery of money as well as having complicated questions to be decided, only civil court has jurisdiction. On merits denying the allegation of forcible holding of the money and requests of refund a number of times since 2008, OP has stated that as per clause 10 (c) of the agreement construction was to be completed within 36 months from the date of its announcement which was so started on 20-6-2008 but the project was delayed only due to global recession and in case of delay the clause provides for compensation of Rs.53.82 per square meter from the date of delay till final possession.  Vide its letter dated 09.07.2010 OP had informed its customers about the reasons for delay further assuring to complete construction expeditiously and undertaking to stand by penalty clause 10(c) of the agreement. Though complainant did not sign the flat buyer agreement but non signing of the same does not absolve him from his obligation under the agreement.  Regarding no response to the communications of the Consumer Grievance Redressal Cell of the Department of Consumer Affairs, OP has denied the same further stating that the same were duly responded to.  Denying all the contents of the complaint, OP has prayed for dismissal of the complaint being not maintainable.
3. Both the parties filed their respective affidavits of evidence along with relevant documents.
4. Heard and perused the record.
5. Complainant has filed copies of, receipts, request letter for cancellation of booking and refund dated 5-9-10, duly received by the OP on 7-9-10, Allotment letter dated 11.09.2010, OP’s letter dated 28.09.2010 specifying that project has started and if even then cancellation is required refund may be made after deducting 15% of Basic Sale Price and communications between the Grievance Cell of Consumer Affairs and the OP.
6. OP has filed undated application for booking Exhibit OP1/1.   Receipts Exhibit OP1/2 (colly), provisional allotment letter dated 23/04.2007 Exhibit OP1/3 and letter dated 09.07.2010 Exhibit OP1/4.  
7. Going through all the record admittedly the flat was booked, complainant had paid Rs. 8,05,200/- till formal launching of project in year 2007. But as per OP’s own admission it was not able to complete the project within scheduled 36 months thereafter and even in the year 2010 OP itself admits no progress on the project further assuring completion of project by the year 2012.  Provisional allotment letter itself states that in case the allotment is not made within six months of the booking, complainant has option to withdraw.  Complainant has duly demanded cancellation and refund of the money while OP kept on demanding the entire outstanding amount.  Not only this OP had deliberately and intentionally avoided to place on record the payment plan and not refunded the money inspite of its inability to complete the project in time.  Even at the time of arguments of this case, the project was not complete as shown by the photographs submitted by the complainant. 
8. On the basis of aforesaid findings, we are of the considered view that OP is deficient in service and has adopted unfair trade practice. Thus, holding OP guilty for the same we direct it to pay, to the complainant, an amount of Rs.8,05,200/- alongwith interest @ 12% per annum from the date of receipt of respective amounts till the final realisation of the same.  We also award an amount of Rs.50,000/- as compensation for harassment and Rs.5,000/- as litigation cost.
9. Order shall be complied within 30 days from the receipt of copy of this order failing which rate of interest of 12% p.a. will be increased to 18% p.a.
10. Let a copy of this order be sent to each party, free of cost, as per regulation 21 of the Consumer Protection Regulations, 2005.  
11. File be consigned to record room.

 

12. Announced on 23-01-2016  

           

                         

             (N.K. Sharma)                                                                      (Nishat Ahmad Alvi)           

               President                                                                                     Member