BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SAS NAGAR, MOHALI

                                  Consumer Complaint No.642 of 2014

                                 Date of institution:          05.11.2014

                                                  Date of Decision:            24.03.2015       

Sachin Goyal son of J.P. Goyal, resident of House No.987, Sector-9, Panchkula (Haryana).

    ……..Complainant

                                        Versus

Royal Mansions through its Managing Partner, Peer Muchhalla, Zirazkpur, District SAS Nagar, Mohali (Punjab).

………. Opposite Party

Complaint under Section 12 of the

Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

CORAM

Mrs. Madhu. P. Singh, President.

Shri A.B. Aggarwal, Member.

Present:    Shri Subhash Chander, counsel for the complainant.

Opposite Party ex-parte.

(Mrs. Madhu P. Singh, President)

ORDER

                The case of the complainant is that the Opposite Party (for short ‘the OP’) is a builder and engaged in construction of apartments/flats at Peer Muchhalla, Zirakpur. The complainant applied and was allotted a Flat No.103, E-Block in the aforesaid project of the OP.  The total cost of the flat Rs.48,50,000/-  was to be paid as per construction linked plan in installments. At the time of allotment, the complainant deposited Rs.15.50 lacs with the OP. An agreement Ex.C-2 regarding terms and conditions of allotment/construction and possession was entered into between the parties.  In pursuance of the agreement the complainant deposited all the installments as per demand/calls made by the OP. In all the complainant deposited Rs.47,50,000/- with the OP from 29.01.2012 to 18.04.2014 as confirmed by the OP vide statement Ex.C-3.  As per Clause-13 of the agreement the OP was to handover possession of the flat within 21 to 24 months from the date of agreement. The complainant had been requesting the OP by visiting personally and by registered letters dated 24.04.2014, 05.09.2014, 17.08.2014 Ex.C-4 to C-6 to handover him the possession of the flat but the OP is not responding to his requests.  Instead of handing over him the possession, the OP is further demanding an amount of Rs.4,36,050/- on account interest @ 18% on delayed payment; EDC/IDC charges of Rs.1,50,000/- and maintenance charges of the flat for two years amounting to Rs.48,000/-.  The complainant served a legal notice dated 16.10.2014 on the OPs to handover the possession but till date the possession has not been handed over to him. As per agreement the OP has to pay Rs.8,925/- per month as delay charges from 29.01.2014 till handing over of physical possession.

                With these allegations, the complainant has sought directions to the OP to pay him Rs.8,925/- per month with interest @ 15% per annum for the period of delay from 29.01.2014 till possession of the flat is handed over to him; not to demand Rs.2,38,050/- on account of various charges; to pay him compensation to the tune of Rs.2,00,000/- for mental agony and physical harassment and litigation expenses to the tune of Rs.25,000/-.

2.             Notice sent to the OP not received back served or unserved. Presuming its due service, the OP was proceeded against exparte on 17.12.2014.

3.             Evidence of the complainant consists of his affidavit Ex.CW1/1 and copies of documents Ex C-1 to C-9.

4.             In view of the decision of Hon’ble Uttrakhand State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in case titled as Consoritum Securities Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. Vs. Smt. Anjana Tyagi,  2013(3) CLT 570 by relying upon the judgment of Hon’ble National Commission in case titled as  Mathura Mahto Mistry Vs. Bindeshwar Jha (Dr.) & another,   2008 (I) CLT 566,  the OP was given three opportunities to rebut the evidence of the complainant.  However, none appeared for it to rebut the evidence of the complainant.

5.             We have heard learned counsel for the complainant and gone through the written arguments filed by him.

6.             The factum of allotment of Flat No.103, E Block to the complainant by the OP is admitted. As per allotment letter the complainant has paid Rs.45,50,000/- as on 31.03.2014 against the agreed sale price of Rs.48,50,000/-.  The disputed point in the complaint is that despite having received payment of Rs.45,50,000/- the OP has issued him statement of account Ex.C-3 showing recoverable amount of Rs.8,95,915/- on account of service tax, EDC & IDC, maintenance, club membership and interest. Out of the said amount on these accounts the complainant has paid Rs.2.00 lacs cash and disputed the levy of other amounts being unexplained.

7.             We have perused Ex.C-3. The demanded amount of Rs.6,95,915/- has been clearly mentioned head wise and said levy as the terms of agreement Ex.C-2 to sell duly executed between the parties. The relevant terms governing the parties qua levy of interest on delayed payment is clause-3 of the agreement clearly stipulates the levy of 18% interest on account of delayed payment beyond two months from the date of demand.  Regarding service tax, EDC & IDC, two years maintenance, club membership etc. there are no specific terms in the buyers agreement Ex.C-2. Therefore, we are of the opinion that levy of such amounts on account of service tax, EDC & IDC, two years maintenance, club membership etc.  are beyond the terms of agreement and this act of the OP is an act of deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. Hence the OP is not entitled to demand of Rs.4,57,865/-  on account of service tax, EDC & IDC, two years maintenance, club membership etc. and demand of such an amount is an act of deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the OP for which the complaint deserves to be allowed and the complainant deserves to be compensated.

8.             In view of above discussion, the complaint is partly allowed with the following direction to the OP to:

(a)    not to demand Rs.4,57,865/- on account of service tax, EDC & IDC, two years maintenance, club membership etc. from the complainant.

(b)    to pay to the complainant a lump sum compensation of Rs. 25,000/- (Rs. Twenty five thousand only) on account of harassment, mental agony and costs of litigation.

                The OP is directed to comply with the above directions within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. Certified copies of orders be sent to the parties free of costs and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room.

Pronounced.                           

March 24, 2015

                                                                      (Mrs. Madhu P. Singh)

                                                                        President

                                                        (A.B. Aggarwal)

Member