BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-I, U.T. CHANDIGARH ======== Consumer Complaint No | : | 673 of 2010 | Date of Institution | : | 02.11.2010 | Date of Decision | : | 28.04.2011 |
Rahul Chhatwal s/o Sh.S.P.Chhatwal r/o H.No.1038, Sector 15-B, Chandigarh ….…Complainant V E R S U S Reliant Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., SCO 60-62, Sector 17-C, Chandigarh through its Authorized Signatory. ..…Opposite Parties CORAM: SH.P.D.GOEL, PRESIDENT SH.RAJINDER SINGH GILL, MEMBER DR.(MRS) MADANJIT KAUR SAHOTA MEMBER Argued by:Sh. Muniesh Goel, Adv. for complainant. None for OP. PER P.D.GOEL, PRESIDENT The complainant namely Sh.Rahul Chhatwal has filed the present complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act (as amended upto date) “hereinafter referred to as the Act”. Put briefly, the facts of the case are that OP invited applications for allotment of residential flats at Santemajra, Tehsil and District Mohali (Pb.). The complainant approached the OP who assured that the built up flat will be allotted by October, 2009. After getting assurance from OP the complainant applied for allotment of residential flat and deposited Rs.2,10,000/- against receipt. It is further the case of the complainant that he was allotted Studio Apartment No.G-16, Tower E on Ground Floor in Work 1 at Mohali by OP for Rs.13,99,0000/-. Thereafter OP prepared buyer’s agreement. The clause 4.a of the said agreement deals with Delivery of Possession and reads that the possession of the apartment is proposed to be delivered by the developer to the purchaser by October, 2009 subject to force majeure circumstances beyond the control of the developer and upon registration of the sale deed provided all amounts due and payable by the purchaser under the agreement had been paid to developer within the stipulated period. It is further averred that OP had failed to deliver the possession as the construction is not complete. It is the case of the complainant that he made the payment of Rs.50,000/- on 12..06.08, Rs.60000/- on 23.06.08, Rs.50,000/- on 18.11.08, Rs.45,000/- on 09.12.2008, Rs.85000/- on 21.01.2009, Rs.25000/- on 18.02.09 Rs.25000/- on 05.03.09, Rs.15000/- on 20.03.09, Rs.68000/- on 24.07.09 vide receipts (Annexures C-4 to C-12) and in toto, paid Rs.6.33 lacs out of Rs.13.99 lacs to the OP. It is averred that OP also issued ledger account from 1.4.08 to 31.3.11 which further proves that he had made the payment of Rs.6.33 lacs. According to the complainant, he waited for the delivery of the possession of the flat but OP failed to deliver the same despite his visits and requests. In the month of December, 2009, the complainant enquired about the status of the flat and he was assured by OP that the project is under construction. The complainant alleged that OP had failed to deliver the possession of the flat by the end of October, 2009, which amounts to deficiency in service, hence this complaint. 2. OP filed replied and took preliminary objections viz-a-viz concealment of facts and maintainability of the complaint were raised. On merits, it is replied that the complainant has failed to comply with the terms and conditions of the agreement dated 14.5.2008 which includes the clear payment schedule which has to be followed by every buyer. The said payment schedule is given in clause 2.c of the agreement. It is further replied that the complainant was asked to make payment of Rs.2,09,850/- and Rs. 3,49,750/- vide letters 09.7.2008 and 17.9.2008 respectively. However, it is admitted that as per the buyer agreement agreed between the parties, the construction of the flats had to be completed by October, 2009 provided all the amounts due and payable by the purchaser under the said agreement have been paid to the developer within the stipulated period. It is further replied that the complainant has not made all the payments due from him and only 50% of the payment has been made by him. Pleading that there is no deficiency in service, prayer for dismissal of the complaint has been made. 3. The parties led evidence in support of his contentions. 4. We have heard the learned counsel for the complainant and have also perused the record. 5. The complainant has filed his affidavit to support the averments made in the complaint. Annexure C-1 is the copy of allotment letter vide which Studio Apartment No.G-16, Tower E on Ground Floor in Work 1 at Mohali was allotted to the complainant by OP for Rs.13,99,000/-. The complainant had deposited the amount of Rs.2,10,000/- and the balance is to be paid through local cheque/DDs according to the payment plan. The complainant has also placed on record the copies of the receipts i.e. Annexure C-2 for Rs.50000/- and Rs.1,60,000/- Annexure C-4 for Rs.50,000/-, Annexure C-5 for Rs.60,000/-, Annexure C-6 for Rs.25,000/- and Rs.25000/-, Annexure C-7 for Rs.25000/- and Rs.20000/-, Annexure C-8 for Rs.60000/- and Rs.25000/-, Annexure C-9 for Rs.25000/-, C-10 for Rs.25000/-, Annexure C-11 for Rs.15000/- and Annexure C-12 for Rs.68000/- . Annexure C-3 is the copy of the buyer agreement. The clause 4.a of the said agreement reads as under:- “4. a. Delivery of Possession: That the possession of the Apartment is proposed to be delivered by the Developer to the Purchaser by October 2009 subject to force majeure circumstances beyond the control of the Developer, and upon registration of sale deed provided all amounts due and payable by the Purchaser under this Agreement have been paid to the Developer within the stipulated period It is. however, understood between the Parties that the possession of various Blocks / Towers comprised in the Complex shall be ready and complete in phases and after the completion the Apartment shall be handed over to the Purchaser ii) It is agreed that the Developer shall also be entitled to reasonable extension in delivery of possession of the Apartment on account of any default or negligence attributable to the Purchaser's fulfillment of conditions of the Agreement”. 6. OP has raised the plea that the complainant had not made the payment within the stipulated period and in support of this OP has placed on record the letters (Annexure R-1 and R-2) vide which the demand of Rs.2,09,850/- and Rs.3,49,750/- on 09.7.2008 and 17.9.2008 were raised respectively. It is also admitted by the OP in para No. 2 of the reply on preliminary objections that the complainant has paid 50% of the payment. It is further admitted that the possession of the flat was to be delivered by the OP to the complainant by the end of October, 2009 which OP-Company failed to do so. As per the photographers (Annexures C-14to C-17) and newspaper clipping (Annexure C—18), placed on record it is proved that the OP has failed to raise the construction within the stipulated period and thus it is concluded that it was not possible for OP to deliver the possession of the flat to the complainant by the end of October, 2009 as agreed upon vide buyer agreement (Annexure C-3). Therefore, OP has no legal right to raise the demand of Rs.2,09,850/- and Rs.3,49,750/- vide letters 09.7.2008 and 17.9.2008 from the complainant. OP has failed to refund the deposited amount of the complainant despite his repeated requests which amounts to deficiency in service. 7 As a result of the above discussion, this complaint is accepted and OP is directed to refund Rs.6,33,000/- to the complainant along with interest @ 9% p.a. from the respective dates of its deposits till realization along with Rs.25,000/- as compensation for mental agony and harassment and Rs.5000/- as costs of litigation within one month from the date of receipt of the certified copy. 8. The certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge. The file be consigned. | Sd/- | | Sd/- | Sd/- | 28.04.2011 | [ Madanjit Kaur Sahota] | | [Rajinder Singh Gill] | (P.D.Goel) | cm | Member | | Member | President |
| | MR. RAJINDER SINGH GILL, MEMBER | HONABLE MR. P. D. Goel, PRESIDENT | DR. MRS MADANJIT KAUR SAHOTA, MEMBER | |
