Delhi

North West

CC/378/2015

Sh. Ramesh Chand Arora - Complainant(s)

Versus

Sh. Rajiv Chauhan - Opp.Party(s)

13 Nov 2017

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM : NORTH-WEST

       GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

      CSC-BLOCK-C, POCKET-C, SHALIMAR BAGH, DELHI-110088.

 

CC No: 378/2015

D.No.______­­__________________                          Dated: _________________

< 

IN THE MATTER OF:

 

RAMESH CHAND ARORA

S/o SH. RAM PRAKASH ARORA,

R/o H. No. 16, GALI No. 1, BAJAJ ENCLAVE,

KAKROLA, NEW DELHI-110059.                                  … COMPLAINANT

 

 

Versus

 

SH. RAJIV CHAUHAN S/o SH. A.S. CHAUHAN,

C/o CHAUDHARY PROPERTIES,

21, SHARDA NIKETAN, PITAM PURA,

DELHI-110034.                                   … OPPOSITE PARTY

 

 

 

CORAM :SH. M.K. GUPTA, PRESIDENT

                SH. BARIQ AHMED, MEMBER

      MS. USHA KHANNA, MEMBER 

                                                        

                                                            Date of Institution: 26.03.2015

            Date of decision: 13.11.2017

 

SH. M.K. GUPTA, PRESIDENT

ORDER

 

1.       The complainant has filed the present complaint against the OP under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 thereby alleging that the complainant booked a plot no. C-81 of 100 Sq. Yds. in Ganga Vihar

CC No. 378/2015                                                                        Page 1 of 11

          (previous name as Pink City) in the village Sadullabad, Ghaziabad, U.P. on 24.08.1987 @ Rs.200/- per Sq. Yd. i.e. at a total cost of Rs.20,000/- with the OP and advance payment of Rs.15,000/- was deposited vide receipt no. 704 dated 24.08.1987 and the remaining payment of Rs.5,000/- was deposited on 26.08.1987 vide receipt no. 719 dated 26.08.1987 as “full & final-No balance” remarks given by OP. The complainant further alleged that the said plot was a 3 side open plot as per the map displayed by the OP. The complainant further alleged that the OP has ensured that the plot will be handed over to the complainant very soon but the OP did not fulfill his commitment. OP issued letters dated 21.09.1987 & 23.06.1990 to deposit some more money. The complainant wrote letters on 04.05.1989 & 25.06.1990 but the OP did not respond and on telephone asked the complainant to deposit Rs.4,918/- for E.E. charges failing which the plot will be cancelled. Though the complainant resisted for the same but deposited the amount of Rs.4,918/- vide receipt no. 6270 dated 18.03.1993 and asked the OP for execution of the sale deed of the plot but in vain. The complainant further alleged that OP again asked the complainant on telephone to deposit Rs.5,000/- as registration fee for Registry and Rs.6,700/- for Non-Judicial stamp papers for Registry to his Munshi in Ghaziabad which amount was deposited by the

CC No. 378/2015                                                                        Page 2 of 11

          complainant with the Munshi of the OP in the Court. Again OP asked the complainant to deposit Rs.5,000/- for the said plot for some charges which were also deposited vide receipt no. 9846 dated 12.04.1998. The complainant further alleged that despite various phone calls OP gave only assurance for the Registry. On being harassed, the complainant filed a complaint to Hon’ble L.G. on 27.06.1998 and to the D.C.P. Ashok Vihar on 28.08.1998. The police called both the parties on 25.10.1998 where the OP asked the complainant to give all original receipts of payment relating to the said plot which were given by the complainant and the OP marked the receipts “cancelled” and kept those receipts in his bag in the presence of Sh. Manoj Tyagi, Chowki Incharge of the police post Saraswati Vihar. Then the OP shown the Registry of plot no.  C-81, which was a 2 side open plot instead of 3 side open plot and OP replied to the complainant that the map of the colony has been changed but did not give the changed map of the colony to the complainant. The complainant further alleged that practically possession of the plot has not been given to the complainant but the same was shown in the Registry. The complainant further alleged that he wrote many letters dated 20.08.2009, 24.12.2009, 23.06.2010, 07.06.2011, 23.09.2013, 26.05.2014, 04.07.2014 & 14.08.2014 to the OP to give possession of the plot as well as the

CC No. 378/2015                                                                        Page 3 of 11

          copy of map of the colony. The OP sent replies dated 26.08.2009, 12.06.2011 & 12.09.2013 but did not clear the possession of the said plot, though more than 50% buildings have been built up and the residents are residing there and the complainant accordingly alleged that there is deficiency in service on the part of OP.

2.       On these allegations the complainant has filed the present complaint praying for direction to OP to give the possession of the said plot i.e. bearing no. C-81 which is 3 side open plot, return the extra amount of Rs.9,918/- alongwith interest to the complainant and the complainant has also prayed for imposition of penalty of the OP for taking original cash receipts from the complainant in the police post on 25.10.1998 and has also sought litigation cost.

3.       OP has been contesting the complaint and has filed reply where inOP submitted that the complaint is false and not maintainable and liable to be dismissed and the dispute raised by the complainant does not fall within the ambit of Sec. 2 (1)(c ) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. OP further submitted that the sale deed of the plot was executed on 24.04.1998 i.e. about 17 years above and symbolic possession of the plot immediately handed over to the complainant on the same time. OP further submitted that the complainant booked a plot of land with M/s Chaudhary Properties which is a partnership firm and the entire payment was made to the

CC No. 378/2015                                                                        Page 4 of 11

          firm and there is no privity of contract between the parties and the complaint against OP is not maintainable. OP further submitted that the complainant has filed the complaint with sole purpose of avoiding the payment of legitimate dues of M/s Chaudhary Properties i.e. Development charges/maintenance charges etc. as undertaken by the complainant in Para 4 page 2 of the sale deed dated 24.04.1998 and instead of paying the legitimate dues, the complainant has filed the present complaint to avoid the payment of the legitimate dues. OP further submitted that the disposal of the complaint entails the leading of evidence of oral and documentary evidence and therefore the matter falls within the domain of Civil Courts and this Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain the present complaint as the registered office of M/s Chaudhary Properties is situated at Karol Bagh which comes under the jurisdiction of Tis Hazari Forum. OP further submitted that in collusion with erring erstwhile partner of the firm namely Sh. H.S. Chaudhary manipulated/altered the booking receipts and made it Rs.200/- per Sq. Yd. instead of Rs.280/- per Sq. Yd. OP further submitted that the amount of Rs.5,000/- vide receipt no. 9846 paid on 12.04.1998 by the complainant is on account of balance land cost, Registration fees, advocate fees & all incidental expenses i.e. typing etc. OP further submitted that to avoid payment of Registration expenses of

CC No. 378/2015                                                                        Page 5 of 11

          Rs.2,500/- the complainant has made false and frivolous complaint. OP further submitted that at the time of execution of sale deed it was duly explained to the complainant that the plot no. C-81 is a 2 side open plot and not 3 side open plot as insisted by the complainant and after being agreed by the complainant, the sale deed of the plot was executed by M/s Chaudhary Properties in presence of the complainant. OP further submitted that in normal course of practice after acknowledgement of payment of sale deed, the original receipts are destroyed in order to avoid the misuse of the original receipts in future and in case of the complainant, the original receipts has been destroyed. OP further submitted that the complainant was supposed to pay the cost of balance external development work and maintenance charges in addition to the amount paid at the time of execution of the sale deed which is mention in the sale deed dated 24.04.1998. Op accordingly submitted that M/s Chaudhary Properties is always willing handover the possession of the plot, the constructive possession of which is already with the complainant subject to clearance of dues. OP accordingly submitted that there is no cause of action and the complaint is liable to be dismissed.

4.       The complainant filedrejoinder and denied the submissions of OP.

5.       In order to prove his case the complainant filed his affidavit in

CC No. 378/2015                                                                        Page 6 of 11

          evidence and also filed written arguments. The complainant also placed on record documents i.e. copies of payment receipts no. 704 of Rs.15,000/-, receipt no. 719 dated 26.08.1987 of Rs.5,000/- which are issued by Chaudhary Properties & signed by Sh. H.S. Chaudhary as partner, copy of receipt of booking of plot C-81of 100 Sq. Yds which is signed by Sh. H.S. Chaudhary with an endst. “Recd. Full & final payment”, copy of demand notice dated 21.09.1987 issued by Chaudhary Properties demanding a sum of Rs.6,160/- on account of 20% sewers and with an endst. “payment already received” signed by OP, copy of letter dated 04.05.1989 sent by the complainant to OP to issue allotment letter & Registry of plot 100 Sq. Yd. which is 3 side open alongwith copy of postal receipt & A.D. card,copy of demand letter dated 23.06.1990 issued by OP demanding arrears of Rs.9,500/- for construction of Septic Tank @ Rs.20/- per Sq. Yd.,copy of reply/objections dated 25.06.1990 of the complainant to the OP raising objections with respect to the demand, copies of receipts no. 6270 of Rs.4,918/-, receipt no. 9846 dated 12.04.1998 of Rs.5,000/- issued by OP, copy of complaint sent to Hon’ble The L.G., Govt. of N.C.T. of Delhi, to the Commissioner of Delhi Police, copy of complaint dated 28.08.1998 to the Dy. Commissioner of Police, Ashok Vihar, New Delhi, copy of Sale Deeddated 24.04.1998 signed by only the Vendor i.e. OP, copy

CC No. 378/2015                                                                        Page 7 of 11

          of letter dated 20.08.2009 sent by the complainant to the OP demanding possession of the plot no. C-81, 100 Sq. Yds. alongwith copy of postal receipt, copy of complaint dated 24.12.2009 of the complainant to the OP alongwith postal receipt to the effect that on 26.08.2009 on the visit of the complainant to the colony, Sh. Mahesh Mishra, the Watchman of the OP only showed “C-Block” & there was no demarcation of the plots alongwith postal receipt, copies of letters dated 23.06.2010, 07.06.2011, 23.09.2013, 26.05.2014, 04.07.2014 &14.08.2014 sent by the complainant to the OP alongwith postal receipts andcopies of letters dated 26.08.2009, 12.06.2011 & 18.09.2013 of the OP to the complainant.

6.       On the other hand, Sh. Rajiv Chauhan, OP filed his affidavit in evidence which is as per lines of defence taken by OP in the written statement. OP also filed written arguments. OP also placed on record carbon copy of receipt no. 704 dated 24.08.1987 of Rs.15,000/- on which there is an endst. about rate “Rs.280/- per Sq. Yd.”. OP has also placed on record copy of final report/charge sheet filed u/s 173 Cr.P.C. in the Court of M.M., Rohini Court, Delhi.

 

7.       This Forum has considered the submissions of both the parties. As already observed, the complainant has placed on record copies of

CC No. 378/2015                                                                        Page 8 of 11

          payment receipts showing rate as Rs.200/- per Sq. Yd. and plot no. C-81 being a 3 side open plot. The OP has taken a defence that rate of plot was Rs.280/- per Sq. Yd. and with respect to this defence OP has filed carbon copy of 1^st receipt no. 704 showing rate as Rs.280/- per Sq. Yd. Though there is an overwriting in the copy of receipt placed on record by the complainant & making as Rs.200/- per Sq. Yd. but the OP has deliberately failed to file carbon copy of 2^nd receipt no. 719 despite the fact that an opportunity was given to the OP. Moreover, in the 2^nd receipt no. 719 issued by OP there is an endst. “no balance”. It shows that rate of plot was Rs.200/- per Sq. Yd. and there is no merit in the defence of the OP.

8.       The complainant in his letter dated 20.08.2009 has admitted that Registry of plot no. C-81 was made on 24.04.1998 and given to him on 25.10.1998. In the said letter, the complainant has also stated that the possession of the plot has not been given and has further stated that “I shall be grateful if you kindly give me possession of my plot at the earliest”. In his letter/reminder dated 26.05.2014, the complainant has also stated that “I am very much interested to take possession of my said plot and also very much interested to give the amount of maintenance etc. of the said plot to the OP”. It is the admitted case that the complainant handed over original payment receipts to the OP in the police post at the time of

CC No. 378/2015                                                                        Page 9 of 11

          execution of Registry. Otherwise, the complainant ought not to have handed over the original payment receipts to the OP. It seems that at that time the complainant has agreed for plot no. C-81 and only thereafter OP has executed the Registry before the concerned Authority at Ghaziabad and the complainant being the purchaser of the plot is required and under a legal obligation to pay the necessary/requisite Registry charges to the OP. The photocopy of the receipts placed on record by the complainant shows that the complainant booked a 3-side open plot bearing no. C-81and measuring 100 Sq. Yds. but the OP at the time of Registry of the plot converted the plot booked by the complainant to a 2-side open plot and accordingly, in these circumstances, this forum is of opinion that OP was not justifiedin converting the plot of the complainant to a 2-side open plot and this action of OP amounts to deficiency in service.Thus, OP is held guilty of deficiency in service.

9.       Thus, holding guilty for the same, we direct the OP to

1.  

ii) To adjust the amount of Rs.9,918/- in the account of the complainant.

CC No. 378/2015Page 10 of 11

iii) To pay to the complainant an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation for harassment and mental agony suffered and includes litigation cost.

 

10. The above amount of compensation shall be paid by the OP to the complainant within 30 days from the date of receiving of this order failing which OP shall be liable to pay interest on the entire awarded amount @ 10% per annum from the date of receiving of this order till the date of payment. If OP fails to comply with the order within 30 days from the date of receiving of this order, the complainant may approach this Forum u/s 25 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

11. Let a copy of this order be sent to each party free of cost as per regulation 21 of the Consumer Protection Regulations, 2005. Thereafter file be consigned to record room.

Announced on this 13^th day of November, 2017.

 

 

 BARIQ AHMED                        USHA KHANNA                         M.K. GUPTA

   (MEMBER)                               (MEMBER)                         (PRESIDENT)

 

 

 

 

 

CC No. 378/2015                                                              Page 11 of 11