ROHIT BANSAL filed a consumer case on 07 Feb 2023 against SH TEJINDER BANSAL. in the Panchkula Consumer Court. The case no is CC/134/2022 and the judgment uploaded on 22 Feb 2023.
BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, PANCHKULA
Consumer Complaint No | : | 134 of 2022 |
Date of Institution | : | 22.04.2022 |
Date of Decision | : | 07.02.2023 |
Rohit Bansal s/o Sh. Ram Kumar Bansal, Resident of Flat No.501, Tower-12-A, Suncity Parikarma, Sector-20, Panchkula, Haryana.
….Complainant
Versus
1. Sh. Tejinder Bansal, Managing Director and Proprietor, BCL Homes Ltd., Village Kishanpura, Adjoining Sector-20, Panchkula, NAC Zirakpur, District Mohali, Punjab.
2. Mr.B.K.Wahi, Booth No.37, M.S.Enclave, Dhakoli, Peermuchalla, Zirakpur, District Mohali. ….Opposite Parties
COMPLAINT UNDER
Before: Sh. Satpal, President.
Dr. Pawan Kumar Saini, Member
Dr. Sushma Garg, Member
For the Parties: Sh. Vikas Malik, Advocate for the complainant.
OPs No.1 & 2 already ex-parte vide order dated 28.06.2022.
ORDER
(Per Satpal, President)
1. Briefly stated, the facts of the present case are that the complainant had applied for the allotment of a plot having 200sq.yards area in Chinar Urban Villa Complex to be developed by OP No.1 in pursuance to advertisement/notice published in Amar Ujala Newspaper on 20.04.2012. The OP No.2 informed the complainant that he had been selected for the allotment of a plot in the said Chinar Urban Villa Complex at discounted price and accordingly, the complainant visited the office of OP No.1 on 20.04.2012 and was asked to deposit a sum of Rs.5,00,000/-. It is stated that the complainant was tempted by the offer of plot at discounted price and accordingly, paid a sum of Rs.3,50,000/- on 20.04.2012 and Rs.1,50,000/- on 21.04.2012 to OP No.1 vide receipt No.4373 and 4381, respectively. It was assured by the OPs that the plots will be allotted and handed over to the complainant within a period of 6 to 8 months positively but no allotment of plot as promised was made for several months. Later on, it was informed by the OP No.1 that the project was not approved and complainant was given an option to transfer his offer of allotment of plot into shop/office no.204 on second floor measuring 12x20 sq.feet at a price of Rs.26,25,000/- in Chinar Business Centre. It is stated that the complainant, being a doctor, was constrained to accept the offer of OP No.1 for starting his clinic to earn livelihood by way of self-employment. The amount of Rs.5,00,000/- paid earlier, on 20.04.2012 and 21.04.2012, was transferred by OP No.1, as booking amount for shop/office vide receipt no.6112 dated 03.05.2013. No shop/office as promised was allotted or handed over against the said booking amount. Several requests were also made through OP No.2 for allotment of shop/office which yielded no fruitful results. Since, there was no hope of the allotment of a shop/office, complainant applied for cancellation of shop/office on 02.05.2014, which was duly acknowledged and accepted by OP No.1 but booking amount of Rs.5,00,000/-was not refunded. On 23.07.2014, the OP No.1 had undertaken to refund the entire amount of Rs.5,00,000/-within a period of 8-10 months but the said amount has not refunded to the complainant till date. Similar requests were made to OP No.2 also but no action was taken to refund the booking amount paid by the complainant; thus, both OPs No.1 & 2 are jointly liable to refund the booking amount which was lying deposited with the OP No.1. A legal notice dated 20.01.2022 was served upon the OPs seeking refund of entire amount of Rs.5,00,000/- with interest but no response has been received from OPs till date. Due to the act and conduct of the OPs, the complainant has suffered mental agony, harassment and financially; hence, the present complaint.
2. Notices were issued to the OPs No.1 & 2through registered post, which were not received back either served or unserved despite the expiry of 30 days from the issuance of notices to OPs No.1 & 2; hence, they were deemed to be served and thus, due to non appearance of OPs No.1 & 2, they were proceeded ex-parte by the Commission vide its order dated 28.06.2022.
3. To prove the case, the ld. counsel for the complainant has tendered affidavit as Annexure C-A along with documents Annexure C-1 to C-5 in evidence and closed the evidence by making a separate statement.
4. We have heard the ld. counsel for the complainant and gone through the entire record available on the file including written arguments filed by the complainant, minutely and carefully.
5. During arguments, the learned counsel for the complainant, while reiterating the averments made in the complainant as well as Affidavit Annexure C-A, contended that the OP No.1 has failed to fulfill its promise as made vide undertaking(Annexure C-4) given on 23.07.2014 qua the refund of booking amount of Rs.5,00,000/- to the complainant and thus, has prayed for acceptance of the complaint by granting the relief as claimed for in the complaint.
6. Evidently, a sum of Rs.3,50,000/-and an another sum of Rs.1,50,000/- was paid by the complainant to OP No.1 on 20.04.2012 and 21.04.2012, vide receipts(Annexure C-1 & C-2) respectively, qua the allotment of a plot measuring 200sq yrds in Chinar Urban Villa Complex. The payment of sum of Rs.5,00,000/- as paid qua the allotment of a plot was adjusted against the allotment of a shop no.204, as per receipt(Annexure C-3 & C-4). As per unrebutted contentions of the complainant, the OP No.1 firstly failed to fulfill its promise qua the allotment of a plot in proposed Chinar Urban Villa Complex and lateron, failed to provide the shop no.204 in Chinar Business Centre as promised vide receipt(Annexure C-3). Further, the OP No.1 has failed to refund the deposited amount to the complainant as undertaken by him vide undertaking dated 27.03.2014(Annexure C-4) wherein it is found that he(OP No.1) had promised to refund the amount within 8-10 months. Even the legal notice dated 20.01.2022(Annexure C-5) seeking the redressal of the genuine grievance of the complainant failed to evoke any positive response. The OPs have preferred not to contest the present complaint for the reasons best known to them and thus, we have no option except to conclude that the OPs No.1 & 2 are deficient qua his services rendered to the complainant; hence, the complainant is entitled to relief.
7. As a sequel to the above discussion, we partly allow the present complaint with the following directions to the OPs No.1 & 2:-
8. The OPs No.1 & 2 shall comply with the directions/order within a period of 45 days from the date of communication of copy of this order to OPs No.1 & 2 failing which the complainant shall be at liberty to approach this Commission for initiation of proceedings under Section 71/72 of CP Act, against the OPs No.1 & 2. A copy of this order shall be forwarded, free of cost, to the parties to the complaint and file be consigned to record room after due compliance.
Announced on: 07.02.2023
Dr.Sushma Garg Dr.Pawan Kumar Saini Satpal
Member Member President
Note: Each and every page of this order has been duly signed by me.
Satpal
President
Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes
Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.