Delhi

North East

CC/71/2017

BHUVANESHWAR PRASAD DIXIT - Complainant(s)

Versus

RAMASANDESH BUILDCOM PVT. LTD. - Opp.Party(s)

01 Aug 2022

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION: NORTH-EAST

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

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

 

Complaint Case No. 71/17

In the matter of:

 

Bhuvnewshwar Prasad Dixit

S/o Sh.Rameshwar Prasad Dixit,

R/O 4^th Floor, New Durga Mandir,

East Ram nagar, Shahdara,

North East Delhi-110032                                                                Complainant

	Vs.

Ramasandesh Buildcon Pvt. Ltd.

303, Malhotra complex, A-212,

Gali No.1, Sakarpur, Opp. Shipra Hotel

Vikas Marg, Delhi-110092

                                                                                                 Opposite Party

 

 

 

DATE OF INSTITUTI ON:                ORDER RESERVED ON:                          DATE OF ORDER:

25.02.2017 22.07.2022 01.08.2022

 

CORAM:

Surinder Kumar Sharma, President.

Anil Kumar Bamba, Member.

 

ORDER

 

Surinder Kumar Sharma, President

Case of Complainant

1. The case of the complainant as revealed from the pleadings is that the complainant had booked a flat in Virandavan bearing no. Type-B, 2BHK (720 SQ.FT.) on 29.01.2016. It is alleged by the complainant that he had paid a sum of Rs. 1,59,000/- by cheque no. 336641 dated 26.01.2016 the Opposite party issued a receipt against the cheque vide receipt no. 000760. The Opposite party assured the complainant to provide him the allotment letter within 3 days but the Opposite Party failed to do so. It is also alleged by the complainant that he personally visited the Opposite Party’s office for allotment letter of his flat but the Opposite Party did not give any satisfactory response to the complainant. It is also alleged by the complainant that he wrote a cancellation letter for his booking and refund of the amount on 07.07.2016. This shows deficiency on the part of OP. The Complainant has prayed for directing the Opposite Party to pay Rs. 2,00,000/- as compensation on account of harassment and mental agony. He has also prayed for Rs. 25,000/- as litigation charges along with refund of Rs. 1,59,000/- along with interest.

Case of Opposite Party.

2.  The Opposite Party contested the case and filed written statement to          the complaint of the Complainant. It is stated by the Opposite Party that the Complainant has not approached with clean hands. It is alleged that the Complainant has no cause of action against the Opposite Party. It is alleged that the complaint is time barred. It is stated that the Complainant approached the Opposite Party for booking of a flat at Virandavan. He filed an application for registration on 26.01.2016. He also deposed a sum of Rs. 1,59,000/-. It is stated that the total cost of the flat was Rs. 15,00,000/- in addition to the other charges. As per the terms of Application-cum-Registration Form, the applicant can cancel his registration and it would be cancelled subject to the deduction of 10 % of the transaction value or any other charges. On 30.05.2016,  the Complainant requested the Opposite Party that the above mentioned amount may be adjusted in 100 sq. yards plot which he intended to purchase from the Opposite Party. Then the Opposite Party provided the estimate of the cost of the said plot to the Complainant. Thereafter, the Complainant did not approach the Opposite Party for allotment of plot. Nor the Complainant made the payment for allotment of the plot. The Complainant did not make any request for cancelation of his booked flat nor he asked for refund of the booking amount. The Opposite Party has denied the allegation of the Complainant and prayed for dismissal of complaint.

Rejoinder to written statement of Opposite Party

3. The Complainant filed rejoinder to the written statement of Opposite Party wherein he has denied the preliminary objection raised by the Opposite Party and has reiterated his averments made in the complaint.  

 

Evidence of the parties

4. The Complainant in support of his complaint filed his affidavit wherein he has supported the assertions made in the complaint. The Opposite Party in support of its case has filed the affidavit of Shri Arbind Kumar Singh who is authorised representative of the Opposite Party. In his affidavit he has supported the case of the Opposite Party as mentioned in the written statement.

Arguments and Conclusions

5.  We have heard the Learned counsel for the Complainant. We have also perused the file and the written argument filed on behalf of the Complainant. None appeared on behalf of the Opposite Party for addressing arguments.
6. The case of the Complainant is that he booked a flat with the Opposite Party. This flat was in Virandavan and the Complainant paid Rs. 1,59,000/- as booking amount to the Opposite Party. The case of the Complainant is that he booked a flat at vrindavan for a total cost of Rs. 15,00,000/-. He paid Rs. 1,59,000/- to the Opposite Party along with his Registration Form. The case of the Complainant is that the Opposite Party did not issue him the flat number as per the assurance given by the Opposite Party. Then the Complainant wrote a letter dated 07.07.2016 to the Opposite Party for cancellation of his flat as there was no construction work carried out by the Opposite Party for in respect of the said flat which was to be allotted to the Complainant. The Complainant has placed on record the copy of the said letter dated 07.07.2016. On the other hand the case of the Opposite Party is that the Complainant requested for allotting him a plot of 100 sq. yards instead of the flat. it is also the case of the Opposite Party that the Complainant did not request for cancellation of his flat nor the Complainant asked for refund of his booking amount. As per the case of Opposite Party the Complainant also requested the Opposite Party to adjust the amount of               Rs. 1,59,000/- against the cost of the said plot. It is important to note that the Opposite Party has not filed any document to support its contentions and therefore, these contentions raised by the Opposite Party cannot be accepted.
7.   In view of the above discussion, the complaint is allowed. It is ordered as under: (i) The Opposite Party shall pay the Complainant a sum of Rs. 1,59,000/-(That is booking amount of the flat) from the date of filing the complaint till its recovery along with interest @ 6 % p.a.(ii) The Opposite Party shall pay the Complainant Rs. 30,000/- on account of harassment and mental agony along with interest @ 6 % p.a. from the date of this order till the recovery of this Samount. (iii) The Opposite Party shall pay Rs.20,000/- to the Complainant on account of litigation charges along with interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of this order till its recovery.

Copy of this order be given to the parties free of cost.

File be consigned to Record Room.

Order announced on 01.08.2022.

 

(Anil Kumar Bamba)                                                            (Surinder Kumar Sharma)      

       (Member)                                                                                  (President)