PER DR (MRS.) MADANJIT KAUR SAHOTA, MEMBER

              Shorn of all unnecessary details, suffice it to mention here that this complaint has arisen on account of non-refund of amount deposited by the Complainant, despite repeated requests. It was alleged in response to the Scheme floated by the OP for allotment of residential plots in Shalimar Estates Naggal – Alipur (Panchkula) Phase-I, the Complainant applied for a residential plot & was allotted Plot No. 555 (6 Marlas), whereafter she deposited a total sum of Rs.68,115.86 in the shape of installments. It was alleged that considerable period has gone, but neither any project has started nor there was any development on the site, despite umpteen number of written requests. Hence, the present complaint. Hence this complaint, alleging that the aforesaid acts of the OP amount to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice.

2.             Notice of the complaint was sent to OP seeking their version of the case.

3.             OP in its reply admitted the factual aspects of the case. It was pleaded that the Complainant deposited the due installments with the OP after admitting all the terms and conditions as mentioned in the application form. It was denied that the Complainant ever visited the office of the OP. It was asserted that the Haryana Govt. has wrongly launched the criminal proceedings against the OP, which has been challenged before the Hon’ble High Court by way of filing a CWP, wherein stay has been granted and the Writ Petition stands admitted. Moreover, the possession of the plot would be given to the Complainant, but the Complainant choose to approach this Hon’ble Forum just to harass, pressurize and to lower down the reputation of the OP. All other material contentions of the complaint were controverted. Pleading that there was no deficiency in service on their part, a prayer has been made for dismissal of the complaint.

4.             Parties led evidence in support of their contentions.

5.             We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have also perused the record.

6.             Annexure A-2 is the sale agreement executed between the parties on 30.03.2002 and in view of Clause number 5 thereof, the possession of the plot was to be given to the allottee in about 5 years from the date of allotment.  The contention of the complainant is that infact the OP has not obtained the permission from HUDA nor they obtained the sanction due to which they have not been able to set up the colony.  The OP in para number 5 of the written statement admitted that the Government of Haryana wrongly launched criminal proceedings against them for developing Shalimar Estates, which action was challenged by the OP before the Hon`ble High Court and demolition and dispossession of the OP by Haryana Government has been Stayed. The OP did not produce any document to suggest if they had obtained necessary permission/sanction to set up the colony.  Had it been so, the question of the Government of Haryana initiating criminal action against them would not have arisen.  We are therefore of the opinion that the OP did not have the permission of setting up the colony but they mislead the complainant to believe that they could set up the colony and sell the plot and obtained from her the amount in question. Due to the above fact, in our view, the OP was not entitled to demand any due payment of installment from the complainant vide Annexure D-4. The OP is therefore guilty of adopting unfair trade practice in collecting the money without obtaining prior sanction to set up the colony.

7.             The OP has obtained the amount of Rs.34931.25p from the complainant as earnest money vide Annexure A-2 dated 30.03.2002 and Rs.33184.69 vide receipt Annexure A-4 dated 27.01.2003. In those days, the prices of immoveable property were low and the complainant therefore would have purchased some other property to cover her head.  Due to the illegal action of OP, she has been deprived of purchasing other property at reasonable rates for which the OP must pay compensation to the complainant.

8.             The OP by retaining the amount of the complainant is therefore liable to compensate the complainant by refunding the amount alongwith interest.

9.             In view of the above discussion, we are of the opinion that the OP must refund the amount of Rs.68115.94 alongwith interest @12% p.a. since the date of deposit, till its payment alongwith litigation costs of Rs.5,500/-.  The amount shall be refunded within 30 days from the date of its receipt as mentioned above failing which the OP would be liable to pay interest @18% p.a. on the said amount from the date of deposit, till the payment is actually made to the complainant.

              Certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge.  The file be consigned.