Delhi

North East

CC/420/2015

Vinod Dogra - Complainant(s)

Versus

Shree Sainath Infratech Pvt. Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

10 Jun 2020

ORDER

            DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM: NORTH-EAST

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

D.C. OFFICE COMPLEX, BUNKAR VIHAR, NAND NAGRI, DELHI-93

 

Complaint Case No.  420/15

 

In the matter of:

 

	Shri Vinod Dogra R/o 53A, Pocket F GTB Enclave, Delhi-110095	Complainant
	Versus
	M/s Shree Sainath Infratech Pvt. Ltd. Front Side of House no. 65 First Floor, Sector 12A Dwarka Delhi-110075	Opposite Party

 

DATE OF INSTITUTION:       JUDGMENT RESERVED ON:               DATE OF DECISION      :

23.10.2015 10.06.2020 10.06.2020

 

N.K. Sharma, President

Ms. Sonica Mehrotra, Member

 

Order passed by Ms. Sonica Mehrotra, Member

 

ORDER

1. Shorn of unnecessary details, facts laid out in the present complaint are that the OP, carrying on business of construction and property building had launched its ‘Sai City’ project proposed to come at Village Gunsi, Tonk Road, Jaipur Rajasthan sometime in early 2011 and the complainant applied for booking, allotment and registration of a residential plot in the said project in May 2011 and booked a plot no. 11 admeasuring 365.24 sq.yd. at the rate of  Rs. 1,137/- per sq. + 15% PLC with OP for a total sale consideration of Rs. 4,77,596/- out of which the complainant paid  Rs. 1,09,304/- to OP vide cheque no. 602239 dated 11.05.2011 drawn on HDFC Bank towards booking amount duly acknowledged receipt of by OP vide receipt no. 3306 dated 18.05.2011. The OP issued a letter dated 11.05.2011 in favour of the complainant confirming tentative allotment of the said plot subject to terms and conditions of payment acknowledging the receipt of the amount. Thereafter, complainant paid Rs. 15,345/- to OP vide cheque no. 373158 dated 16.11.2011 drawn on Canara Bank towards first installment which was duly acknowledged by OP vide receipt on 10057 dated 20.11.2011 thereby complainant paying the OP a total sum of  Rs. 1,24,649/-. The complainant also claimed to have paid the second installment of Rs. 15,345/- to OP. The complainant has submitted that there was no progress update on construction on the said site given by the OP to complainant despite his several visits and telephone calls asking for completion for essential formalities nor was any assurance given about the allotment and registration procedure by OP to the complainant and the complainant was shocked on his visit to the proposed project site to find that there was no commencement of any construction and there was only a barren desert at the site. The complainant suddenly received a letter dated 20.12.2014 from OP informing him about the cancellation of his booking and forfeiture of the deposited amount living complainant with no lien on the particular plot in question. The complainant on receipt of the said letter immediately visited the OP office and requested to the refund the deposited amount of Rs. 1,24,649/- alongwith interest @ 18% but OP refused to give refund. The complainant got issued a legal notice dated 06.07.2015 through his counsel to OP demanding refund of Rs. 1,24,649/- alongwith interest but the said legal notice despite receipt by OP went un-responded too. Therefore as a last resort, the complainant alleging negligence and deficiency of service on the part of OP filed the present complaint praying for issuance of direction against the Op to refund Rs. 1,39,994/- towards booking amount and installments alongwith interest @ 18% p.a. from date of payment i.e. May 2011 till filing of the complaint amounting to Rs. 1,00,795/- and compensation of  Rs. 50,000/- for deficiency of service.
2. Complainant has attached copy of propose lay out plan of Sai City to come up at Viallage Gunsi, Tonk Road, Jaipur Rajasthan original receipt dated 18.05.2011 and 20.11.2011 issued by OP acknowledging receipt of Rs. 1,24,649/- towards booking amount and first installment, copy of letter dated 11.05.2011 issued by OP to complainant detailing the terms and conditions of the payment qua residential  plot no. 11 admeasuring 365.26 sq.yd. in its Sai City project, copy of letter dated 20.12.2014 by OP to complainant informing about the change of address from Janakpuri Delhi to Dwarka Delhi with effect from 1^st January 2015, copy of original letter dated 20.12.2014 by OP to complainant informing about cancellation of booking and forfeiture of amount and copy of legal notice dated 06.07.2015 by complainant’s counsel to OP alongwith Original courier AWB receipt.
3. Notice was issued to the OP on 19.11.2015, however none appeared on behalf of OP deposited service effected on 15.12.2015 and was therefore proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated 11.02.2016.
4.  Ex-parte evidence by way of affidavit was filed by the complainant exhibiting the documents filed / relied upon in the complaint as Ex CW1/1 to CW1/8.
5. Written arguments were filed by the complainant in reassertion of his grievance against OP for non-refund of Rs. 1,39,994/-. Complainant was directed in hearing held on 10.12.2019 to place on record the proof of payment of second installment of  Rs. 15,345/- paid to OP as alleged by him. However, he admitted to having no proof of payment of the said amount in hearing held on 07.02.2020 leaving the issue to be decided by this Forum.

For oral arguments, due to COVID-19 pandemic, the complainant telephonically informed office of this Forum to consider his pleadings as arguments and adjudicate the complaint case as per documents submitted by him. We have keenly perused the pleadings and documents placed on record by the complainant, the OP being ex-parte. On bare perusal of records, the same proves beyond reasonable doubt that the complainant had paid Rs. 1,24,649/- out of the total sale consideration of amount of Rs. 4,77,596/- to OP between May 2011-November 2011 with respect to the residential plot booked with it which paid amount constituted more than 25% of the total value of the said plot. Curiously enough, there was no communication between the parties for next three years i.e. from November 2011 to November 2014 and on 20.12.2014, on one hand OP has written to the complainant intimating the change of address w.e.f. 01.01.2015 and on the other hand had issued a letter of the same date i.e. 20.12.2014 cancelling the booking of the complainant and forfeiting amount paid. Such an act by OP is sheer deficiency of service and unfair trade practice on the part of OP for having retained the complainant’s money for three years and then suddenly cancelling the booking and forfeiting the deposited money unilaterally after three years in December 2014 on baseless and uncorroborated pretext of complainant’s failure to make payment when there is nothing on record for the same. We find it a fit case to rely upon the judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Pioneer Urban Land and Infrastructure Ltd. Vs Govindan Raghavan II (2019) CJP 34 (SC) and Kolkata West International City Pvt. Ltd. Vs Devasis Rudra II (2019) CPJ 29 (SC) and hold OP guilty of deficiency of service. The complainant has been unable to prove payment of Rs. 15,345/- towards second installment made to OP and therefore it cannot be taken into account for purpose of relief by way of refund. We therefore direct OP to refund the sum of Rs. 1,24,649/- alongwith interest @ 6% from the date of filing of the complaint till realization to the complainant. We further direct OP to pay a sum of Rs. 5,000/- to the complainant as compensation for the deficiency of service and unfair trade practice of unilateral cancelation of booking and forfeiture of deposit after enjoying it for three years. Let the order be complied with by OP within 30 days of receipt of copy of this order.

6. Let the copy of this order be sent to both parties free of cost as per Regulation 21 (1) of Consumer Protection Regulation 2005.
7.   File be consigned to record room.
8.   Announced on  10.06.2020

 

(N.K. Sharma)     President

(Sonica Mehrotra)  Member