DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SAHIBZADA AJIT SINGH NAGAR (MOHALI)
Consumer Complaint No.1002 of 2017
Date of institution: 20.11.2017 Date of decision : 12.09.2018
Urvashi Anand wife of Shri Sanjay Anand resident of 12901 Halls Purchase Lane, Bowie, MD 20721 (USA).
2nd Address: R/o House No.83, Sector 28-A, Chandigarh.
…….Complainant
Versus
1. Shri J.S. Bajwa, Managing Director, M/s. Bajwa Developers Pvt. Limited, Regd. Office, Sunny Business Centre, 5h Floor, New Sunny Enclave, Greater Mohali (Punjab).
2. M/s. Bajwa Developers Pvt. Limited, through its Managing Director J.S. Bajwa, Regd. Office, Sunny Business Centre, 5h Floor, New Sunny Enclave, Greater Mohali (Punjab).
……..Opposite Parties
Complaint under Section 12 of
the Consumer Protection Act.
Quorum: Shri G.K. Dhir, President,
Shri Amrinder Singh Sidhu, Member.
Mrs. Natasha Chopra, Member.
Present: Shri Gaurav Gupta, counsel for complainant.
Shri Amit Sharma, counsel for OPs.
Order by :- Shri G.K. Dhir, President.
Order
Complainant after falling in trap of OPs on account of allurements given through advertisements, agreed to purchase residential plot bearing No.9113 of 125 sq. yards in Sunny Enclave, Residential Township, Tehsil Kharar, District Mohali. Said plot was allotted on payment of sale consideration of Rs.7,50,000/- by complainant to OP. Letter dated 15.10.2011 was issued. Possession was assured to be delivered within period of one year from the date of issue of no dues certificate dated 15.10.2011. Complainant is an NRI and purchased the plot for her residence during her visits to India. Since after the purchase of plot, complainant visited office of OPs many times for calling upon them to execute buyer agreement, but same has never been executed by OPs. Rather OPs during period of 2012-13 disclosed complainant during her visits that Govt. approvals yet to be obtained. Even request to OPs was made for executing sale deed after visiting the office, but to no effect. This complaint filed after serving legal notice dated 09.08.2017 by claiming that OPs adopted unfair trade practice and rendered deficient services. Prayer made for directing OPs to handover physical possession of the plot in question to complainant. Even compensation for mental harassment and agony of Rs.10.00 lakhs and litigation expenses of Rs.55,000/- more claimed.
2. In reply filed by OPs, it is pleaded inter alia as if complainant herself approached OPs for expressing willingness to purchase plot measuring 125 sq. yards in Sunny Enclave by agreeing to pay total sale consideration of Rs.7.50 lakhs. After making payment of installments, complainant never visited India. Rather it is claimed that plot is ready for delivery of possession since from 2012, but despite intimation sent to complainant, she has not responded thereto. Complainant has no local representative for receiving communication and nor she has authorised any person to get possession from OPs. OPs always remained ready and willing to execute the sale deed in favour of complainant. Complainant is residing in USA and her claim regarding visits to the office of OPs number of times is alleged to be false one. Other averments of the complaint denied by claiming that OPs are ready to handover physical possession of the plot and even willing to execute the sale deed in favour of complainant, but on payment of necessary stamp duty by her.
3. Complainant to prove her case tendered in evidence her affidavit Ex.CW-1/1 alongwith documents Ex.C-1 and Ex.C-2 and then closed evidence. On the other hand counsel for OPs tendered in evidence affidavit Ex.OP-1/1 of Shri Baldev Singh Bajwa, Director of OPs and thereafter closed evidence.
4. Written arguments in this submitted by complainant, but not by OPs. Oral arguments heard and records gone through.
5. Undisputedly complainant has paid full and final amount of Rs.7,50,000/- for purchase of residential plot No.9113 of 125 sq. yards and the same fact even borne from the no due certificate issued by OPs on 15.10.2011, as is placed on record as Ex.C-1. It is the claim of complainant that OPs have not handed over possession of the plot and nor executed the sale deed, despite repeated visits by her to office of OPs. This contention vehemently controverted by counsel for OPs by contending that complainant, an NRI, has never visited office of OPs for calling upon it to execute the sale deed or handover physical possession of the plot in question.
6. Complainant has not specified in the complaint or in the affidavit the dates, month or year, as to when she visited office of OPs for calling upon OPs to handover possession of the plot or to execute sale deed in her favour. So allegations regarding repeated visits by complainant to office of OPs remains vague in this respect. However, one thing appeals to reason and common sense that a person who has paid amount of Rs.7.50 lakhs will not remain quite for long time since after issue of no due certificate Ex.C-1 on 15.10.2011. Therefore, even if the allegations in the complaint may have remained vague regarding repeated visits by complainant to OPs, but those are believable because complainant after paying full and final payment of sale consideration amount, not bound to remain silent.
7. Even if complainant is an NRI visiting India occasionally, despite that OPs have not issued any letter for calling upon complainant to get sale deed executed, despite the fact that complainant had given her USA address as well as of Sector 28-A, Chandigarh. That address of complainant even mentioned in letter Ex.C-1 dated 15.10.2011. In view of this, it is obvious that OPs virtually were having address of complainant available with them, on which correspondence may be had by OPs with complainant. Despite availability of this address of complainant with OPs, the later remained silent for six years untill filing of complaint and as such inference is obvious that virtually OPs not shown to have offered possession actually to complainant and nor OPs offered to execute registered sale deed in favour of complainant. Complainant was divested of benefit of paid amount of Rs.7,50,000/- by OPs by not disclosing the date, as to when possession was offered and as such certainly submission advanced by counsel for complainant has force that complainant was harassed by OPs by not offering possession. If contents of written reply and affidavit of representative of OPs taken as correct that plot was ready for delivery of possession in 2012, then why OPs kept silent for five years thereafter untill filing of complaint on 20.11.2017 by complainant in this Forum, qua that no plausible explanation coming forth. Rather long silence of more than 5 years on part of OPs in not making efforts to contact complainant for offering possession or executing sale deed itself enough to show that OPs have utilized deposited amount of complainant without providing due benefit to complainant. As fault lay with OPs in not making offer of possession for five years and even the allegations regarding contact by complainant to OPs during numerous visits are vague and general and as such fitness of things warrants that composite compensation for loss of interest and mental harassment and agony of Rs.1.00 lakh should be allowed in favour of complainant and against OPs. For checking dilly-dally tactics of OPs, period must be fixed within which OPs will hand over possession of plot in question to complainant and also will execute registered sale deed. As complainant stood dragged in this litigation due to inaction of OPs in not informing complainant about date of delivery of possession and execution of registered sale deed and as such somewhat hefty amount of litigation expenses needs be allowed in favour of complainant and against OPs with rider that in case amount of compensation and litigation expenses not paid by the specified period, then complainant should be held entitled to interest @ 7% per annum for the defaulting period of payment of compensation.
8. It is contended by counsel for OPs that violation of
Section 3 (c) of Stamp Act is committed by complainant by not getting the attorney embossed. That question is not much material because deficiency in stamp duty can be got made good at any time. Complainant before filing of this complaint even issued legal notice Ex.C-2 dated 09.08.2017 through post, but despite that OPs have not replied to that notice and as such same circumstance also shows as if fault is with OPs in not delivering the possession and executing the registered sale deed.
9. As a sequel of above discussion, complaint allowed with direction to OPs to handover physical possession of Plot No.9113 of 125 sq. yards to complainant within two months from the date of receipt of copy of the order. The OPs are also directed to execute the registered sale deed regarding this plot in favour of the complainant within two months of date of receipt of copy of order provided the complainant approaches the OPs during this period. Expenses for registration of the sale deed i.e. stamp duty, typing charges etc. will be borne by the complainant. Compensation for mental agony and harassment of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rs. One Lakh only) and litigation expenses of Rs.11,000/- (Rs. Eleven thousand only) more allowed in favour of complainant and against the OPs. Payment of these amounts of compensation and litigation cost be made within 30 days from receipt of certified copy of order failing which the complainant will be entitled to interest @ 7% per annum after expiry of said period of 30 days till receipt of payment by the complainant. Certified copies of the order be supplied to the parties as per rules. File be indexed and consigned to record room.
Announced
September 12, 2018.
(G.K. Dhir)
President
(Amrinder Singh Sidhu)
Member
(Mrs. Natasha Chopra)
Member
