Punjab

Fatehgarh Sahib

RBT/CC/1288/2018

Asit Kumar Ram - Complainant(s)

Versus

Sky Rock City Welfare Society - Opp.Party(s)

Nirmal Singh Jagdeva

07 Dec 2021

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, FATEHGARH SAHIB.

                                                                    RBT/CC/1288/2018

Complaint No.1288 of 2018

                                                                   Date of Institution: 07.12.2018

                                                                   Date of Decision: 13.12.2021

Asit Kumar Ram S/o Late Sh. D.N. Ram R/o Flat No.117, Sanskriti Apartments, DDA High Rise, Sec-19D, Dwarka, New Delhi 110075        

                                                                                       …………...Complainant

                                                Versus

1. Sky Rock City Welfare Society (Regd) SAS Nagar Mohali through its president Navjeet Singh, President, Sky Rock City Welfare Society, Site Office 111-112, Near CGC College, Landran, SAS Nagar Mohali.
2.  

 

2. Navjeet Singh President, Sky Rock City Welfare Society (Regd) through its President Navjeet Singh, Sky Rock City Site Office 111-112, Near CGC College, Landran, SAS Nagar Mohali. Punjab

 

3. Greater Mohali Area Development Authority (GMADA) through its chief Administrator, Puda Bhawan, Sec-62 SAS Nagar, Mohali, 160055, www.gamada.gov.in, email id:skyrockcity973@gmail.com

..………....... Opposite Parties

Complaint under Section 11/12 of Consumer Protection Act 1986

Quorum

Sh. Pushvinder Singh, President

Sh. Manjit Singh Bhinder, Member

 

Present: Sh. N.S. JagdevaAdv, counsel for the Complainant.

     Sh.Anuj Kohli Adv, counsel for the OP no.3

Order By

Pushvinder Singh, President

 

1.              The present complaint has been filed by the complainant against the OPs (other parties), with a prayer to direct the OPs to return the amount paid by him along with interest, cost and compensation.
2.                The complainant has alleged that complainant is a member of the Sky Rock City Welfare Society Mohali, he availed the housing services of the OP for allotment of a plot. The complainant had purchased this plot for his own family residence purpose. The plot was not purchased for commercial purpose or for resale purpose. Thus, the complainant is a consumer of OP as per section 2(1)(d) of CP Act. In the year 2009-10 society had launched a scheme of housing by giving plot to its members. The complainant had also applied vide his application from dated 27.08.2011 along with payment of Rs.10000/- which is enclosed herewith as Ex. C-1 and he became a member of OP society. A copy of the receipt of payment of Rs.10000/- is enclosed as Ex. C-2. The OP society issued a share certificate reflecting his membership No. 2466 is enclosed herewith as Ex. C-3.
3.                  The complainant after enrolment of his membership booked one 100 Sq. yards plot with OP society of Rs.10500/- per Sq. yard. The complainant was informed that plot would cost his Rs.10,50,000/-. The society would hand-over the possession of the plot within two year from the date of registration. At the time of booking of plot complainant was allured by the Manger of OP who represented to the complainant that OP had all the necessary permissions of Punjab Govt/GMADA to launch the project. He even agreed to arrange bank loan. He tried every means to get money from the complainant.       
4.                   It is further mentioned that up to date, the complainant has paid Rs.6,10,000/- to the opposite party i.e. Ex.C-2 receipt No.2466 dated 27.08.2011 amount Rs.10000/-, Ex.C-5 receipt No.3075 dated 27.08.2011 amount Rs.2,62,500/-,and Ex.C-6 receipt No.11520 dated 23.05.2014 amount Rs.3,37,500/- It is clear from the above that Rs.6,10,000 has been paid to OP society. The complainant had made all the payments well on time as demanded by the society from time to time. However, OP failed in obeys its promise to handover the possession of the plot within the stipulated period of 2 year. Since it is a gross breach of terms of allotment letter as such the complainant asked for cancellation of allotment and he be refunded the amount of Rs.6,10,000/- but nothing was done by OP in this regard.
5.                    It has also come to the knowledge of the complainant from the official website of GMADA that the License of OP had been cancelled by the Punjab Govt. and GMADA. Thus, they are not in a position to go ahead with development activities in the area. It is mentioned here that licence No.LDC-18/2014 was issued to OP. This license was obtained by the OP-Society from GMADA under PAPRA Act, 1995 for developing the land as residential colony. It has come to the knowledge from the public notice in a newspaper that the license of the OP-Developer has been cancelled by the GMADA on 07.05.2018.
6.                      The complainant has made a prayer that the plot No.2466 Mohali booked by the complainant may kindly be cancelled and the OP may be directed to refund Rs.6,10,000/- the money of complainant along with 12% interest on the deposit till the date of refund. Complainant also prayed that OP may burdened with cost of Rs.1,00,000/- on account of deficiency in service, mental agony, physical harassment and Rs.22,000/- for litigation expenses.
7.                      Notice of this complaint was given to the OPs and Sh. Ajay Singh, Adv counsel appeared for OP No.1 and 2. It was also found that Sh. Navneet Singh OPs No.1 and 2 President of Sky Rocky City Welfare Society was in jail in criminal cases and he was also summoned by issuing Production Warrant. The OPs No.1 and 2 did not file any reply to the complaint. Number of opportunities was given to the OPs but they did not file any reply. However, OP no.3 appeared through Sh. Anuj Kohli, advocate and filed written statement on behalf of OP no.3 stating that the OP no.3 has no role to play. There is no relation of consumer and service provider exists between the complainant and OP no.3. So, the complaint is bad for misjoinder of parties. The OP no.3 denied all other allegations of the complaint and prayed for dismissal of complaint.
8.                    The complainant has proved in evidence his affidavit in support of the complaint and produced copy of an application from for membership as Ex.C-1, copy of receipts as C-2, C-5 and C-6, letter written to OPs for cancellation and refund. Copy of publication in the newspaper as Ex.C-8 and copy of public notice published in the newspaper as Ex.C-9.On the other hand, Sh. Sanjiv Kumar the Estate Officer submitted an affidavit on behalf of Op No.3.
9.                  I have heard Sh. N.S. Nagdeva, advocate counsel for the complainant and Sh. Anuj Kohli, adv, counsel for the OP no.3 through video conferencing. The complainant by way of affidavit produced in support of complaint has reiterated the facts contained in the complaint and has also deposed and proves the copies of receipts as C-2, C-5 and C-6 vide which he deposited a total sum of Rs.6,10,000/-. But the possession of plot was never given to the complainant. The Ops no.1 and 2 appeared through counsel but did not file any reply/version. Even we find that there are number of complaints pending against the OP no.1 and 2 and number of complaints have already been decided against them and they have been directed to return the amounts paid by the members of the society which were received by OP no.2 Navneet Singh with the assurance to provide a plot but the OPs no.1 and 2 never developed any residential colony. The copy of public notice issued by the OP no.3 GMADA is Ex.C-9 on the file which clearly shows that the OPs no.1 and 2 failed to give any plot to the purchaser and received the money and even the licence which was given by GMADA to the OPs no.1 and 2 for the development of residential colony was valid only up to 05.05.2017 and the OPs failed to get the license renewed in time after rectifying the deficiencies conveyed by GMADA from time to time. The OPs no.1 and 2 also did not deposit the dues on account ADC, license fee etc. with GMADA and as such the license of OPs no.1 and 2 was cancelled by the competent authority vide order dated 02.05.2018.
10.                  Accordingly, we find that the OPs no.1 and 2 made false representation of the facts about the goods and services i.e. allotment of plot and delivery of possession in the stipulated period. The act and conduct of OPs no.1 and 2 are a clear case of misrepresentation and dissection which resulted in the injury and loss of opportunity to the complainant. The builder is under the obligation to deliver the possession of plot within a reasonable period. The complainant cannot be said to wait indefinitely to get possession of the plot booked from the facts and evidence brought on record of the complaint it is clearly made out that OPs no.1 and 2 knew from very beginning that they have not complied with the provision of PAPRA(Punjab Apartment and Property Regulation Act & Rules) and would not be able to deliver possession within the stipulated period, thus by misrepresentation in dues to the complainant to book the plot, due to which the complainant has suffered mental agony and harassment. In these circumstances the complainant is entitled to refund of the amount deposited by him along with interest and suitable compensation.
11.                      As per Rule 17 of the “Punjab Apartment and Property Regulation Rules, 1995, framed under Section 45 of PAPRA, it has been provided as under:-

              “17. Rate of interest on refund of advance money upon cancellation of agreement. -The promoter shall refund full amount collected from the prospective buyers under sub section (1) of Section 6 together with interest thereon at the rate of 12% annum payable from the date of receipt of amount so collected till the date of re-payment. :"

12.                      As a result of our aforementioned discussion, we accept the complaint of complainant and the OPs no.1 and 2 are directed to refund the amount of Rs.6,10,000/- to the complainant along with interest @12% from the date of payment till the date of refund. The OPs no.1 and 2 are also directed to pay a sum of Rs.25,000/- as litigation expenses. The compliance of this order be made by the OPs no.1 and 2 within a period of 45 days on receipt of certified copy of this order. The copy of this order be provided to the complainant and OP no.3 free of cost and copy of this order be sent to Navneet Singh President, Sky Rock City Welfare Society (Regd.) through District Jail Ropar, where OP no.2 is in custody. The file be return back to the District Consumer Commission, Mohali for consignment.

Announced: 13.12.2021

RDS                                           

                                     

 

 

(Pushvinder Singh)

                                                                             President

 

                                                                            

(Manjit Singh Bhinder)

                                                                            Member