District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission ,Faridabad.

Consumer Complaint  No.366/2022.

 Date of Institution: 12.07.2022.

Date of Order: 28.10.2022.

Naresh Bamil son of Shri Balbir Singh, resident of house NO. 3096, J-Block, First Floor, Sainik Colony, Sector-49, Faridabad, District Faridabad, Aadhar card No. 4729 8596 6288

                                                                   …….Complainant……..

                                                Versus

Shree Homes By Sarvome at Sarvome House, Sector-45, Faridabad (Haryana) through its Principal Officer/Authorised Signature.

                                                                   …Opposite party……

Complaint under section-12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986

Now  amended  Section 34 of Consumer protection Act 2019.

BEFORE:            Amit Arora……………..President

Mukesh Sharma…………Member.

Indira Bhadana…………Member.

PRESENT:                   Sh. Vikas Bhadana ,  counsel for the complainant.

                             Opposite party ex-parte vide order dated 21.09.2022.

ORDER:  

                   The facts in brief of the complaint are that  the complainant was allotted flat bearing NO. 402, Tower-N, Shree Homes at Sector-45, Faridabad by the opposite party vide customer code NO. 702.1273 on the basis of application No. 1273, on 09.08.2019.  As per the terms and conditions mentioned in the agreement arrived at between the parties to this complaint, the complainant made the following payments to the opposite parties:-

Rs.1,33,000/- on 15.07.2019.

Rs.1,75,000/- on 26.08.2019

Due to declaration of lock down due to Covid-19 Pendemic, the opposite party cancelled the allotment of the above said flat of the complainant without any prior notice or information to the complainant.  In the year 2021, the employees of the opposite party pressurized the complainant to surrender the aforesaid flat in the opposite party company and when the complainant surrendered the same hen the opposite party allotted another flat bearing NO. 1403, Tower-D. Shree Homes, Sector-45, Faridabad , in favour of the complainant vide customer code NO. 188/1273 dated 26.07.2021.  At the time of allotment of the said flat, the opposite party received other payments from the complainant, as per details given below:-

i)                 Rs.3,50,000/- on 07.07.2021

ii)                Rs.3,35,000/- on 20.10.2021.

The opposite party had received total amount of Rs.9,93,450/- from the complainant in lieu of allotment of above said two flats and the opposite party assured the complainant not to charge any interest from the complainant at the time of allotment of flat No. 1403, in favour of the complainant and they would adjust the payment already received by them in respect of flat No. 402.  Despite of which, it was the opposite party who had raised a demand of Rs.13,32,242/- as interest from the complainant in respect of flat in question, for which they had no right to do so.  Moreover, the complainant was ready to make the payment of principal amount of Rs.13,32,242/- to the opposite party.  The complainant asked several times to the opposite party not to claim any extra payment of Rs.2,48,264/- from the complainant and to receive the actual due amount i.e. Rs.13,32,242/- from him and to deliver the possession of the allot flat bearing No. 1403, Tower-D in favour of the complainant but the opposite party always avoided it on one pretext or the other.  The complainant sent legal notice  dated 01.04.2022 (which was posted on 02.4.2022) to the opposite party but all in vain. The aforesaid act of opposite party amounts to deficiency of service and hence the complaint.  The complainant has prayed for directions to the opposite party to:

a)                not to claim any excess payment of Rs.2,48,264/- from the complainant and to receive the actual due principal amount of Rs.13,32,242/- from the complainant in respect of flat No. 1403, Tower-D, Shree Homes, Sector-45, Faridabad having its carpet area 645.40 sq. ft., Balcony area 100 sq. feet, and to deliver the possession thereof to the complainant immediately.

 b)                pay Rs. 2,00,000/- as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment .

c)                 pay Rs. 11,000 /-as litigation expenses.

2.                Case called several times since morning but none appeared on behalf of opposite party. It was already 2.30p.m.  Waited sufficiently.  No more wait was justified.  Hence, opposite party was hereby proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated 21.09.2022.  

3.                The complainant led evidence in support of his respective version.

4                  We have heard learned counsel for the complainant and have gone through the record on the file.

5.                In this case the complaint was filed by the complainant against opposite party – Shree Homes by Sarvome with the prayer to: a)  not to claim any excess payment of Rs.2,48,264/- from the complainant and to receive the actual due principal amount of Rs.13,32,242/- from the complainant in respect of flat No. 1403, Tower-D, Shree Homes, Sector-45, Faridabad having its carpet area 645.40 sq. ft., Balcony area 100 sq. feet, and to deliver the possession thereof to the complainant immediately.   b)  pay Rs. 2,00,000/- as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment . c)  pay Rs. 11,000 /-as litigation expenses.

                   To establish his case, the complainant  has led in his evidence Ex. Ex.CW-1/A – affidavit of Naresh Bamil, Ex.C-1 – letter dated 10.08.2019, Ex.C-2 – letter dated 26.07.2021, Ex.C-3 to 5– Receipts, Ex.C-6 & 7 – photocopies of cheques, Ex.C-8 – legal notice, Ex.C-9 – postal receipt, Ex.C-10 – track consignment.

6.                There is nothing on record to disbelieve and discredit the aforesaid ex-parte evidence of the complainant. Since opposite party has not come present to

contest the claim of the complainant, therefore, the allegations made in complaint by the complainant go unrebutted. From the aforesaid ex-parte evidence it is amply proved that opposite party has rendered deficient services to the complainant.

7.                After going through the evidence led by parties, the Commission is of the opinion  that  the complaint is allowed. Opposite party is directed to process the claim of the complainant  within 30 days  from the date of receipt of the copy of order and send the demand notice to the complainant  for the principal amount only. Failing which opposite party will pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation to the complainant because counsel for the opposite party  appearing on behalf of opposite party without filing the memo/vakalatnama/any application for setting aside e-parte order and also argued with the Commission that they are not going to file an application for setting aside ex-parte order.  During the

course of arguments, counsel for the opposite party interfering which shows the malafide of opposite party. Copy of this order be given to the parties  concerned free of costs and file be consigned to record room.

Announced on:  28.10.2022                                 (Amit Arora)

                                                                                  President

                     District Consumer Disputes

           Redressal  Commission, Faridabad.

                                                (Mukesh Sharma)

                Member

          District Consumer Disputes

                                                                    Redressal Commission, Faridabad.

                                                (Indira Bhadana)

                Member

          District Consumer Disputes

                                                                    Redressal Commission, Faridabad.