Delhi

North West

CC/442/2020

RUBI DEVI - Complainant(s)

Versus

SHRI KRISHANAM ASHIYANA DEVELOPERS - Opp.Party(s)

D.K.SINHA

07 Jun 2024

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL COMMISSION-V, NORTH-WEST GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI
CSC-BLOCK-C, POCKET-C, SHALIMAR BAGH, DELHI-110088.
 
Complaint Case No. CC/442/2020
( Date of Filing : 03 Dec 2020 )
 
1. RUBI DEVI
S/O SH. PANKAJ R/O N-3/F-228,SAHID SUKHDEV NAGAR,WAZIRPUR INDUSTRIAL AREA,DELHI-110052
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. SHRI KRISHANAM ASHIYANA DEVELOPERS
THROUGH ITS PROP.RANVEER SINGH ,MAIN BUS STAND,LAMPUR GAON,NARELA,DELHI-110040
2. SHRI KRISHAN ASHIYANA PROPERTIES
THROUGH ITS PROP.SH.RANVEER SINGH,MAIN BUS STAND LAMPUR GAON,NARELA,DELHI-110040
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
  SANJAY KUMAR PRESIDENT
 
PRESENT:
 
Dated : 07 Jun 2024
Final Order / Judgement

ORDER

07.06.2024

 

Sh. Sanjay Kumar, President

  1. Brief facts of the present case are that the complainants approached OP in the month of  June 2015 to purchase plot  in Lampur Nahri Gaon and OP agreed to sale at the rate of Rs.6250/- per sq. yard and the payment was to be made in easy installments. The OP had given the visiting card and assured to hand over the possession of the plot after booking of plot/payment of initial amount. It is stated that OP further assured that construction work of the building to be started after payment of initial amount and balance amount in easy installments.
  2. It is stated that complainants booked 30 sq. yard plot and paid initial amount of Rs.15,000/- on 01.06.2015 and thereafter paid Rs.1,60,000/- till the filing of the case but OP did not hand over the possession of the plot. The complainants have filed the receipts of payment on record. It is further stated that after approaching OP several times on the assurances but plots possession was not given than complainant requested to refund the amount with interest but no proper response was given by OP. It is stated that complainants are subjected to mental agony, harassment and OP are guilty of negligence and deficiency of service.
  3. The complainant is seeking relief of refund of Rs.1,60,000/- with interest 24% per annum till realization, compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- on account of mental agony and physical harassment and litigation expenses Rs.25,000/-.
  4. The complainant also filed an application for condonation of delay and reiterated the contents of the complaint.
  5. OP filed WS and taken preliminary objection that present complaint is false, frivolous, baseless and has not iota of truth. It is stated that this Hon’ble Forum has no jurisdiction as property in question is situated in Haryana and all talks were taken place  in Haryana. It is further stated that complainants have concealded the true and material facts from this hon’ble forum and present complaint is abuse and misuse of process of law, therefore, liable to be dismissed.
  6. On merit all the allegations are denied. It is stated that in June 2015 the complainants approached the OP to buy a plot of 30 sq. yard and paid Rs.15,000/- in cash and agreed to pay installments and also agreed after making full and final payments the possession of the plot would be handed over to complainants. It is further stated that OP is ready to give the possession of the plot when complainants makes the payment of remaining  amount of Rs.1,22,500/-. It is stated that the annexure B1, B3, B4 and B5 are forged payment receipts as the signature of OP can easily be distinguished from rest of the annexures. The OP denied the receiving of hard earned money of complainant of Rs.1,60,000/-. It is stated that OP has been harassed and tortured by complainants and entitled to compensation. It is stated that present complaint is liable to be dismissed. The OP also filed reply to application for condonation of delay and reiterated contents of WS.
  7. Complainant filed rejoinder  to the WS of OP and denied all the allegations made therein and reiterated contents of complaint.
  8. Complainant filed evidence by way of affidavit of Rubi Devi and Pankaj. In the affidavit contents of complaint reiterated. Both complainants relied on visiting card of OP Ex.CW1/A and payment receipts Ex.CW1/B1-B6.
  9. The OP given several opportunities to file but failed and right to file evidence closed vide order dated 10.03.2023.
  10. Written arguments filed by complainant.
  11. We have heard Sh. D.K Sinha counsel for complainant. Despite given opportunities neither OP  appeared nor their counsel to address oral arguments. We have gone through the record.
  12. The complainants filed an application for condonation of delay. OP filed detailed reply. It is admitted that OP did not hand over the possession of the plot. As per receipts filed on record the last payment was made to OP by complainants on 06.03.2017. The law is well settled that cause of action continues in the present facts and circumstance of the case where OP agreed to hand over the possession to the complainant. The present case is covered by the judgment of Mehnga Singh Khera & Anr. Vs. M/s Unitech Ltd decided on 18.12.2019 (National Commission). In view of above observation and discussion the application of condonation of delay is allowed. It is pertinent to mention here that the cause of action continues till the possession is not handed over by OP, therefore, present complaint is not barred by limitation.
  13. It is admitted case of the parties that complainant booked 30 sq. yard plot and paid first initial payment of Rs.15,000/- on 01.06.2015. The OP in the WS admitted the fact that it is ready to give  the possession of the plot however disputed the fact that the complainant paid Rs.1,22,500/-. The complainant filed payment receipt Ex.CW1/B1 to B6 for payment of Rs.1,45,000/- to OP. The OP  failed to file any evidence or documents to rebut the receipts of payments proved by complainant. It is proved on record that OP failed to hand over the possession of the flat as promised to complainant. The OP has taken the objection with regard to  territorial jurisdiction of this commission as per section 34 of CP Act, 2019, the complainant is resident of Wazirpur Industrial Area, which falls within the territorial jurisdiction of this District Forum. The contention of the OP has no merit.
  14. On the basis of above observation and discussion the complainant established that OP failed to hand over the possession of the plot and received Rs.1,60,000/-, therefore, we hold OP guilty of deficiency of service and direct to pay Rs.1,60,000/- alongwith interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of complaint till realization, to pay compensation of Rs.20,000/- and litigation expenses of Rs.10,000/- to complainant within 30 days from the date of receipt of the order in case of default directed to pay 9% interest per annum on Rs.1,60,000/- and compensation of Rs.20,000/- till realization. File be consigned to record room.
  15. Copy of the order be given to the parties free of cost as per order dated 04.04.2022 of Hon’ble State Commission after receiving an application from the parties in the registry. The orders be uploaded on www.confonet.nic.in.

 

Announced in open Commission on  07.06.2024.

 

 

 

 

SANJAY KUMAR                 NIPUR CHANDNA                       RAJESH

       PRESIDENT                             MEMBER                                MEMBER   

 
 
[ SANJAY KUMAR]
PRESIDENT
 

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.