,.lBefore the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Rohtak.
Complaint No. : 470.
Instituted on : 25.09.2018.
Decided on : 08.04.2022.
Smt. Raj Kumnari aged 67 years w/o Ram Dass R/o H.No.121/7 Kayasthan Mohalla, Bara Bazar, Rohtak.
.......................Complainant.
Vs.
- Sarva Haryana Gramin Bank, MaIn Branch, Delhi Road, Rohtak through its Chief Manager.
- Housing Board Haryana, C-15, Awas Bhawan, Sector 6, Opp. General Hospital Panchkula, Haryana 134109 through its Chief Administrator.
……….Opposite parties.
COMPLAINT U/S 12 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,1986.
BEFORE: SH.NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT.
DR. TRIPTI PANNU, MEMBER.
DR. SHYAM LAL, MEMBER.
Present: Sh.Yogender Dalal, Advocate for the complainant.
Sh. Ajay Kumar Dua, Advocate for the opposite party No.1.
Sh.Dharmender Kamboj Advocate for opposite party No.2.
ORDER
NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT:
1. Brief facts of the case are that the respondents have invited applications from general public for allotment of flats under EWS Category in Sector-9 Karnal and other places of Haryana. The complainant applied for allotment of a flat under EWS Category vide PC 3582 and application no.1626 and for this purpose she deposited registration charges/earnest money of Rs.109000/- through Sarva Haryana Gramin Bank on 07.10.2014. The complainant has obtained finance facility from the respondent No.1 and at that time the respondent no.2 has obtained signatures of complainant on various papers and also obtained blank cheques and the daughter-in-law of complainant namely Mamta stands guarantor for complainant for said finance. As per terms and conditions of the brochure “In case draw is not held within 6 months from the closing date of registration, then simple interest @ 5.5% per annum will be paid to the complainant after expiry of 6 months from the closing date of registration to the date of draw”. The respondent no.2 has not held the draw of lots of the flats within period of 6 months and they have started lingering on the matter on one pretext or the others. After passing a period of more than 2 years the respondent no.2 has held the draw of flats and complainant was declared successful candidate. But on enquiry the complainant came to know that no flat is ready to deliver the possession of same and even the required formalities were not completed on the spot.. After waiting for a long period and on seeing the delay tactic on the part of respondent no.2 the complainant has decided to surrender the flat and she applied for surrender of flat and requested to refund the earnest money paid by her and also sent the letter dated 23.06.2017. Complainant also intimated the respondent no.1 in this regard through application and also sent emails in this regard. But the officials of the opposite party No.1 started illegally demanding finance amount from the complainant with heavy rate of interest i.e. 16.5% p.a.. The officials of respondent no.2 have misused the blank signed cheque of Smt. Mamta and have filed a complaint u/s 138 N.IAct. Under the compelled circumstances, the complainant has deposited an amount of Rs.160860/- to the respondent no.1. The act of opposite parties is illegal and amounts to deficiency in service. Hence this complaint and it is prayed that opposite parties may kindly be directed to refund an amount of Rs.160860/- from the date of applying for registration of flat alongwith intrest @ 18% p.a. to the date of actual realization and also to pay Rs.50000/- on account of causing mental agony and harassment to the complainant.
2. After registration of complaint, notices were issued to the opposite parties. Opposite party No.1 in its reply has submitted that the matter is between the complainant and respondent no.2. It is however correct that on the request of complainant, the answering respondent granted the loan and Mamta stood guarantor. It is denied that the bank officials have started illegally demanding finance amount from the complainant with heavy rate of interest. On the request of complainant respondent no.1 has granted a loan of Rs.109000/- on 06.10.2014 as earnest money for registration of a flat and after draw, the loan amount was to be repaid in a single bullet payment alongwith interest. The draw was held on 30.09.2016 and after that when the answering respondent made repeated requests to the complainant and Mamta being guarantor to repay the said amount alongwith interest but they avoided the payment on one pretext or the other and in the end, Mamta being guarantor issued cheque no.324482 dated 03.02.2017 for Rs.132765/- of State Bank of India, Rohtak in favour of answering respondent. The answering respondent presented the cheque to the banker for encashment but the same was dishonored and was returned unpaid vide memo dated 04.02.2017 with the remarks “Insufficient Funds”. Therefore a complaint u/s 138 IPC was filed by the answering respondent against Smt. Mamta and when she did not appear in the Hon’ble Court, the non bailable warrants were issued and after that she had deposited the amount and settled the account. There is no fault on the part of answering respondent and the amount has rightly been deposited by Mamta guarantor. The complainant has no right to get any amount refunded. All the other contents of the complaint were stated to be wrong and denied and opposite party prayed for dismissal of complaint with costs.
3. Opposite party No.2 in its reply has submitted that complainant had applied for allotment of flat under EWS category in Sector 9 Karnal. As per terms and conditions of the brochure, the complainant deposited the earnest money of Rs.109000/- alongwith her application form and availed the finance facility from the opposite party No.1. The complainant was successful in the draw of lots, therefore vide letter dated 10.10.2016 she was directed to deposit another sum of Rs.109000/- towards 10% of the tentative cost after draw of lots on or before 15.11.2016. It was also specified that in the said letter that in case complainant fails to deposit the said amount, her registration would be cancelled and registration amount would be forfeited. The complainant never deposited the said amount. The complainant decided to surrender the flat and submitted her surrender request to respondent no.1 and respondent no.1 forwarded her request vide her letter dated 17.07.2017. The surrender request of the complainant was accepted and her name has been included in the seniority list of refund at Sr. No.1456 of 2017 and the amount would be refunded to her as per the Housing Board regulations which were mentioned in the allotment letter dated 10.10.2016 and Housing board Haryana(Allotment, Management and Sale of Tenements) Regulations 1972. The complainant had submitted only a sum of Rs.109000/- and the said amount is to be refunded after deducting 10% as per Housing Board Regulations, hence only the amount of Rs.98100/- is to be refunded to the applicant as per Housing Board Regulations. The claim of complainant for refund of Rs.160860/- is absolutely wrong as even respondent has sought refund of Rs.109000/- on her behalf. All the other contents of the complaint were stated to be wrong and denied and opposite party prayed for dismissal of complaint with cost qua the opposite parties no. 2.
4. Ld. Counsel for the complainant in his evidence has tendered his affidavit Ex.CW1/A, documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C10 and closed his evidence on dated 10.05.2019. Ld. Counsel for opposite party No.1 has tendered affidavit Ex.RW1/A, documents Ex.R1 to Ex.R5 and closed his evidence on dated 15.11.2019. Ld. Counsel for opposite party No.2 has tendered affidavit Ex.RW2/A but failed to conclude his evidence and as such evidence of opposite party No.2 was closed by the order dated 16.09.2019 of this Commission.
5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through material aspects of the case very carefully.
6. In the present case, the contention of the complainant is that opposite party No.2 has collected the earnest money from the general public for allotment of flats and complainant deposited registration charges/earnest money of Rs.109000/- through Sarva Haryana Gramin Bank on 07.10.2014. After passing a period of more than 2 years the respondent no.2 has held the draw of flats and complainant was declared successful candidate. But on enquiry the complainant came to know that no flat is ready to deliver the possession of same and even the required formalities were not completed on the spot. As such complainant has sought refund of alleged amount alongwith interest from the opposite parties but the same is not refunded to the complainant till date. On the other hand, opposite parties in their reply has submitted that since a large number of surrender/refund application amounting to several crores were received from the applicant of various schemes, therefore it was decided by the Board that a seniority list of such applicants should be framed as the financial health of the Board is fragile. The surrender request of the complainant was accepted and her name has been included in the seniority list of refund at Sr. No.1456 of 2017 and the amount would be refunded to her as per the Housing Board regulations which were mentioned in the allotment letter dated 10.10.2016.
7. We have minutely perused the documents placed on record by both the parties. The complainant has deposited an amount of Rs.109000/- in favour of opposite party No.2 in the year 2014 but the construction has not been done by the opposite parties. On the other hand, opposite parties had already admitted that the refund request of the complainant has been accepted and the same will be paid on seniority basis. But despite including the name of complaint in the seniority list in 2017, till date the amount is not refunded to the complainant despite her repeated requests. As such there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties and opposite parties are liable to refund the amount to the complainant.
8. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case we hereby allow the complaint and direct the opposite party No.2 to refund the amount of Rs.109000/-(Rupees one lac nine thousand only) alongwith interest @9% p.a. from the date of deposit i.e. 07.10.2014 till its realisation and shall also pay Rs.10000/-(Rupees ten thousand only) on account of deficiency in service and Rs.5000/-(Rupees five thousand only) as litigation expenses to the complainant. Order shall be complied within one month from the date of decision.
9. Copy of this order be supplied to both the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.
Announced in open court:
08.04.2022.
................................................
Nagender Singh Kadian, President
………………………………..
Tripti Pannu, Member.
………………………………..
Shyam Lal, Member.
