DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION-II

Udyog Sadan, C-22 & 23, Qutub Institutional Area

(Behind Qutub Hotel), New Delhi-110016

Case No.86/2018

Shri Arpit Mishra,

S/o Shri Prem Narayan Mishra,

R/o RZ 138/254, Jagdamba Vihar

West Sagarpur, New Delhi-110046.                                                              

       ….Complainant

Versus

Shri Jatin Nagpal

Nagpal Associates

IGNOU Road, Saket

New Delhi-110030                                                             ….Opposite Party

                                                         Date of Institution        : 22.03.2018       Date of Order                : 08.04.2021

Coram:

Ms. Rekha Rani, President

Ms. Kiran Kaushal, Member

ORDER

Ms. Kiran Kaushal, Member

1. Brief facts as pleaded by the Complainant are that the Complainant Shri Arpit Mishra availed the services of Shri Jatin Nagpal (OP) who is a Property Consultant and works under the name and style of Nagpal Associates, Dealing in Commercial & Residential properties in South Delhi. OP offered to assist the Complainant in locating and renting accommodation.
   1. OP charged a sum of Rs.200/- as token amount from the Complainant which was readily paid by him through Paytm on 07.01.2017.  Complainant thereafter was shown an Apartment on IGNOU road by OP, which the Complainant preferred to rent and asked the OP to fix a meeting with the landlord. OP told the Complainant that the landlord does not entertain any random clients and would meet him only if he paid a sum of Rs.11,000/- as advance rent to him. Accordingly Complainant through his credit card paid sum of Rs.11,000/- to OP on 07.01.2017.  The next day when the Complainant went to the OP’s office and asked him to meet the landlord, OP told him that the landlord is out of station and would come only after a week.  The Complainant was taken aback by this response as he needed the accommodation urgently.    The Complainant asked OP to show any other accommodation in the vicinity as he could not wait for a week to rent the accommodation; upon which OP told the Complainant that no other accommodation was available in his budget. Since the Complainant could not wait for a week he requested OP to refund Rs.11,000/- which was paid towards advance rent. OP refused to refund the said amount stating that the OP had paid Rs.11,000/-to the landlord, who would execute a Lease Deed in Complainant’s favour after a week.
   2.  Aggrieved by the unprofessional and unlawful behaviour of OP Complainant approached this Commission with the prayer to direct the OP to refund the sum of Rs.11000/- with interest @18% p.a., Rs.50,000/- towards for mental harassment and agony and Rs.5000/- towards litigation charges.
2. OP was served notice which is received back in this Commission with the remarks ‘Lenay Say Inkar Kiya.’ Notice being deemed served OP was proceeded exparte vide order dated 05.12.2018. Complainant has filed evidence by way of affidavit and written submissions. 
3. Complainant in support of his case has filed Visiting Card of OP annexed as Annexure C-1 and copy of Credit Card Statement of the Complainant as Annexure C-2.
4. We have heard the submissions of the Complainant and perused the material placed on record. 
5.  Averments made in the complaint and evidence led by the Complainant have remained uncontroverted and unchallenged. Hence, there is no reason to disbelieve the version of the Complainant.        
6. Perusal of the documents placed on record reveal that Mr. Jatin Nagpal (OP) is a Property Consultant who deals in sale, purchase, renting and collaboration of commercial and residential property in South Delhi and NCR. He works under the name of Nagpal Associates. The SBI Credit Card Account Statement annexed as Annexure C-2 further reveals that the Complainant made the payment of Rs.11,000/- to Nagpal Association, New Delhi on 07.01.20217. This a clear cut case of unfair trade practice wherein OP having received a sum of Rs.11,000/- has failed to provide accommodation for rent to the Complainant nor has he  refunded the amount paid.
7. Therefore, OP is directed to refund Rs.11,000/- to the Complainant with interest @ 10% per annum from the date of payment received i.e. 07.01.2017 till realization within 45 days of receipt of copy of this order. Additionally OP is directed to pay Rs.10,000/- for compensation  towards mental harassment, agony and the cost of litigation. Failing which OP shall become liable to pay interest @ 12% per annum on the amount of Rs.11,000/- from the date of payment received till realization.
8. Let a copy of this order be sent to the parties as per rules. Thereafter file be consigned to record room.

Announced on 08.04.2021.