Karnataka

Bangalore Urban

CC/11/1393

Mrs.Soumya Shivaji Rao - Complainant(s)

Versus

SHREE ENCLAVE - Opp.Party(s)

Sriyuths N.S.Mallikarjuna

10 Apr 2012

ORDER

BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT CONSUMER FORUM (Principal)
8TH FLOOR, CAUVERY BHAVAN, BWSSB BUILDING, BANGALORE-5600 09.
 
Complaint Case No. CC/11/1393
 
1. Mrs.Soumya Shivaji Rao
W/o.Mr.Rajnikanth J.C.,Aged about 31 years,residing at no.147,9th main road,Chandrashekaran Block,B.E.M.L.Layout,3rd stage,Rajarajeshwari Nagar,B'lore-560098
 
BEFORE: 
 
PRESENT:
 
ORDER

            COMPLAINT FILED:28.07.2011

                                                  DISPOSED ON:10.04.2012

 

 

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM AT BANGALORE (URBAN)

 

10th DAY OF APRIL-2012

 

  PRESENT :- SRI. B.S. REDDY                  PRESIDENT

                     SRI. A. MUNIYAPPA                 MEMBER

 

       COMPLAINT NO.1393/2011

                                 

Complainant

Mrs.Sowmya Shivaji Rao

W/o Mr.Rajnikanth J.C.,

Aged about 31 years,

Residing at No.147,

9th Main Road,

Chandrashekaran Block,

B.E.M.L. Layout, 3rd Stage,

Rajarajeshwari Nagar,

Bangalore-560 098.

 

Adv:Sri.N.S.Mallikarjuna

& Udaya Kumar

 

    V/s.

 

OPPOSITE PARTY

 

   Shree Enclave,

   Presidency Group,

   Having its Registered Office at   

   No.895/1, ‘Skanda’,

   14th Cross,

   Mahalakshmi Layout,

   Bangalore-560 086.  

   Represented by its Partner   

   Mr.V.Bhaskar Reddy.

 

   Present Address

   at:No.1, 4th Main,    

   Kuvempunagar,

   Doddakallasandra,

   Bangalore-62.

 

   Adv:Sri.G.S.Suresha.

 

O R D E R

 

Sri.B.S.REDDY,PRESIDENT

The complainant filed this complaint Under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act of 1986 seeking direction against Opposite Party (herein after called as O.P) to refund an amount of Rs.6,00,000/-paid towards initial sale consideration for the site to be allotted and for damages of Rs.4,00,000/- with interest at 18% p.a. on the allegation of deficiency in service.

 

2. Though OP appeared through their counsel but in spite of sufficient opportunity given OP has not filed the version.

 

 3.The complainant in order to substantiate complaint averments filed affidavit evidence and produced documents.

 

4. Arguments on complainant’s side heard.

 

5.We have gone through the complaint averments, the affidavit evidence of the complainant and the documents produced. On the basis of these materials, it becomes clear that the complainant entered into an agreement of Sale with OP on 07.11.2007 in respect of Plot No.52 proposed to be formed in the layout called as ‘SHREE ENCLAVE’ at Beemanahalli, Billakempanahalli Village, Bidadi Hobli, Ramanagaram Taluk, Bangalore Rural District and paid initial sale consideration of Rs.6,00,000/- to OP through cheque dt.18.10.2007 drawn on HSBC Bank, Bangalore. OP has issued the receipt acknowledging the receipt of the cheque and the cheque has been encashed. After receipt of the initial consideration OP has not intimated the complainant about the progress made with regard to the proposed layout. OP failed to fulfill its obligation by forming the layout and allotting the site as per the terms of the agreement deed. Even complainant filed complaint before the CCB Police on 04.06.2011 against the OP and the CCB Police registered the case. The complainant got issued legal notice dt.08.06.2011 calling upon OP to refund the advance sale consideration with interest at 18% p.a. and to pay liquidated damages of Rs.4,00,000/-. The Legal Notice returned un-served. Thus it becomes clear that OP has not formed any layout as shown in the agreement deed and allotted any site to the complainant. When OP was not able to form any layout and allot the site it would have been fair enough on its part to refund the amount received as initial sale consideration to the complainant. The act of OP neither forming any layout and allotting the site nor refunding an amount received as initial sale consideration amounts to deficiency in service on the part of the Op.

 

7.There is no reason to disbelieve the unchallenged affidavit evidence of the complainant, and the documents produced. The very fact of Op not filing version leads to draw inference that Op is admitting the claim of the complainant. Under these circumstances, we are of the view that the complainant is entitled for refund of the initial sale consideration of Rs.6,00,000/- paid to the Op with interest at 18% p.a. by way of compensation from the date of agreement till the date of realization and for litigation cost of Rs.2,000/-. Accordingly, we proceed to pass the following:


O R D E R

       

        The complaint filed by the complainant is allowed in part.

Op is directed to refund an amount of Rs.6,00,000/- with interest at 18% p.a. from 07.11.2007, till the date of realization and pay litigation cost of Rs.2,000/- to the complainant.  

 

This order is to be complied within four weeks from the date of its communication.

 

 Send copy of this order to both the parties free of costs.

(Dictated to the Stenographer and typed in the computer and transcribed by her verified and corrected, and then pronounced in the Open Court by us on this the 10th day of APRIL-2012.)

                   

 

                                                                        

MEMBER                                                       PRESIDENT

 

 

 

Cs.

 

 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

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.