Punjab

Sangrur

CC/397/2016

Gurjit Kaur - Complainant(s)

Versus

SERVE HIT DEVELOPERS (INDIA) LIMITED - Opp.Party(s)

Shri Rajnish Verma

05 Dec 2016

ORDER

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SANGRUR

                             

                                                                   Complaint no. 397                                                                                       

                                                                     Instituted on:  13.05.2016

                                                                   Decided on:    05.12.2016

 

Gurjit Kaur wife of Tarsem Singh son of Narang Singh resident of village Mehlan near Jogewala Khuh, Tehsil Sunam, District Sangrur.  

                                                …. Complainant.      

                                         

Versus

 

1.   SERVE HIT DEVELOPERS (INDIA) LIMITED, Near Old Bus Stand , A.B.C Medical Store, Ist Floor, Suratgarh-335804 ( Rajasthan), through its Chairman, Sukhminder Singh @ Sukhwinder Singh Dandiwal.

2.   Sukhminder Singh @ Sukhwinder Singh Dandiwal son of Gurcharan singh son of Arjan Singh resident of Village Mirpur Kalan, Tehsil Sardulgarh, District Mansa ( Punjab) M.No.092163-90221, Chairman of Serve Hit Developers ( India) Limited.

3.     Rajender Kumar son of Nathu Ram resident of H.No.749/A, Ward No.16, Near Ram Leela Ground, Mahaveer Colony, Hissar, ( Haryana) M.No.92157-97888, 94165-27638, CEO of Serve Hit Developers ( India) Limited.

4.     Balbir Singh Saini son of Mula Ram resident of Near Dhanak Dhermsala, Shiv Chowk, District Sirsa, ( Haryana)  M.No.098126-56406 Managing Director of Serve Hit Dwevelopers ( India) Limited.

5.     Satish Kumar Choudhary son of Milakh Raj resident of Village  Mirpur,  District Sirsa ( Haryana) No.098127-65444, Managing Director of Serve Hit Developers ( India) Limited.

6.     Serve Hit Developers ( India ) Limited, Dhuri Road, Near Civil Hospital Opposite Mahindra Finance Company, Sangrur throgh its Branch Manager.

      ….Opposite parties.

 

 

FOR THE COMPLAINANT:    Shri Rajnish Verma,  Advocate                          

 

FOR THE OPP. PARTIES  :     Exparte                   

 

 

Quorum

         

                    Sukhpal Singh Gill, President

Sarita Garg, Member

                 

 

ORDER:  

 

Sukhpal Singh Gill, President

 

1.             Gurjit Kaur complainant has preferred the present complaint against the opposite parties (referred to as OPs in short) on the ground that she deposited lump sum of Rs.1,00,000/-  by opening an account with OP no.6. The  maturity value was Rs.1,26,000/- and maturity date was 17.04.2016.  The OPs agreed to  provide a plot of 500 Sq. feet or an amount of Rs.1,26,000/- at the time of maturity to the complainant. After the  maturity date i.e. 17.04.2016, the complainant approached the OPs and requested to release the maturity amount and after submission of original policy papers  but OPs flatly refused to  accede the request of complainant  and did not make the payment. Thus, alleging deficiency in service on the part of OPs, the complainant has sought following reliefs:- 

i)      OPs be directed to make the payment of Rs.1,26,000/- along with interest @18% per annum from the date of maturity  till payment or to handover the possession of the plot as per agreement,  

ii)     OPs be directed to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs.20000/- as compensation   on account of mental agony, harassment,

iii)     OPs be directed to pay Rs.10,000/- on account of deficiency in service and to pay Rs.5500/- as litigation expenses.

2.             Notices were issued to the OPs but despite service the OPs did not appear and as such the OPs were proceeded exparte.

3.             In his exparte evidence, the complainant has tendered documents Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-4 and closed evidence.

4.             From the perusal of documents placed on the file and after hearing the arguments of the learned counsel for the complainant, we find that Gurjit Kaur  complainant deposited an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- with OPs under CDPP-9 ( Cash down payment plan)  for 24 months against registration number 00010204 on 17.04.2014. The  OPs had to repay the amount to the complainant after maturity period to the tune of Rs.1,26,000/- or to hand over a plot of 500 Sq.yards which is evident from policy document Ex.C-2.  The complainant has specifically stated in his complaint that as per agreement  after the date of maturity  she approached the OPs and requested to release the maturity amount by showing the original policy.  Surprisingly, the complainant has not produced on record any document/ record which could show the demand of payment or plot of 500 sq.yards in writing which is mandatory. Moreover, the  complainant has not produced on record any written proof showing the efforts made to get released the maturity amount from the OPs.  Further, the complainant has not produced  a copy of alleged written agreement executed between the complainant and the OPs.  We also find that since the complainant has not completed the formalities by way of submitting the documents for release of the maturity amount or handing over the plot by the OPs he is not entitled to raise a demand for release of  maturity amount  or handing over the plot at this stage. Hence, from the facts stated above, we feel that the present complaint was pre-maturily filed by the complainant.

6.             Accordingly, in view of the above discussion,  the present complaint is dismissed being pre-mature. However, the complainant can again approach the Forum after completing all the formalities. Copy of the order be supplied to the parties free of charge. File be consigned to records in due course.                       

                Announced

                December 5, 2016

 

 

( Sarita Garg)                                           (Sukhpal Singh Gill)                                                                                      

Member                                                       President