DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SAHIBZADA AJIT SINGH NAGAR (MOHALI)
Consumer Complaint No.371 of 2016
Date of institution: 21.06.2016
Date of decision : 07.03.2018
Bharti age 35 years wife of Sh. Munit Kumar, resident of H.No.3272/2, Sector 40-D, Chandigarh.
…….Complainant
Versus
1. Sky Rock City, SCO No.672, First Floor, Sector 70, Mohali through its Manager/President.
IInd Address:
Site office, behind CGC Landran, Sector 111-112, Mohali (Pb.).
2. Sh. Navjeet Singh, President, Sky Rock City, SCO No.672, First Floor, Sector 70, Mohali, Punjab.
IInd Address:
Site office, behind CGC Landran, Sector 111-112, Mohali (Pb.).
……..Opposite Parties
Complaint under Section 12 of
the Consumer Protection Act.
Quorum: Shri G.K. Dhir, President,
Shri Amrinder Singh Sidhu, Member.
Mrs. Natasha Chopra, Member.
Present: Shri R.N. Maurya, counsel for the complainants.
OPs Ex-parte.
Order by :- Shri G.K. Dhir, President.
Order
Complainant with intention to purchase residential plot, approached OPs in June, 2011 because of floating of scheme in Sector 111-112, Mohali adjoining CGC Landran by them. Complainant was interested in purchase plot of 100 sq. yards and OPs claimed that said plot @ Rs.10,000/- per sq. yard with total cost of Rs.10.00 lakhs will be available. Besides it was disclosed that development charges @ Rs.1,000/- per sq. yard will be payable as per rules of PUDA/GMADA. OPs took complainant at site of Phase-1 for making her to know about the location of site. After being convinced that scheme floated by OPs is beneficial and trustworthy, complainant paid Rs.5,000/- towards membership fee vide receipt No.2292 dated 10.06.2011. First installment of 25% of total amount was to be paid at the time of booking and remaining price was to be paid as per schedule. Rs.2,50,000/-, being 25% of the amount of first installment was paid to OPs through cheque at the time of submission of application on 10.06.2011. The complainant made following payments:
i) Rs.5,000/- vide receipt No.2292 dated 10.06.2011 – Membership.
ii) Rs.1,50,000/- vide receipt No.2986 dated 10.06.2011
iii) Rs.1,00,000/- vide receipt No.2987 dated 10.06.2011
iv) Rs.50,000/- vide receipt No.5543 dated 25.11.2011.
v) Rs.2,50,000/- vide receipt No.5707 dated 21.12.2011
vi) Rs.75,000/- vide receipt No.9592 dated 06.08.2012
vii) Rs.1,60,000/- vide receipt No.15245 dated 25.03.2015
viii) Rs.1,90,000/- vide receipt No.14660 dated 01.06.2015
ix) Rs.1,75,000/- vide receipt No.12015 dated 13.09.2015
Total amount of Rs.11,55,000/- in this way has been paid. Complainant was informed initially that OPs have got CLU from CTP, PUDA. Demand of further sum of 5% amounting to Rs.50,000/- was put forth for deposit of charges of change of land use. Those amounts were deposited even by complainant. OPs even issued demand letters dated 29.09.2011. Demand of Rs.75,000/- towards EDC even was put forth by OPs and said amount of Rs.75,000/- even was deposited by complainant. Thereafter news item published in various newspapers as if unauthorized colonies in Punjab without obtaining licences from Punjab Govt. have developed and action will be initiated against them. So complainant like other applicants approached OPs for calling upon them to show the documents regarding getting of approvals from PUDA/GMADA/Punjab Govt. OPs vide letter dated 20.08.2013 claimed to have got restored the promoters licence of OPs. However, letter dated 20.08.2013 of OPs clearly shows that they were not having promoters license till 27.05.2013. OPs failed to show documents of promoters licence despite demand. However, in the month of March, 2015, OPs informed telephonically to complainant as if draw of plots scheduled for 31.03.2015. OPs claimed as if first list is already prepared and preparation of second is in progress. It was disclosed as if those who have paid 90% of the amount would be included in the draw and that is why complainant made payments on 16.03.2015 and 18.03.2015 of Rs.1,90,000/- and Rs.1,60,000/-. Complainants got knowledge as if OPs got conducted draw secretly on 01.04.2015 at Hotel JW Marriot, Sector 35, Chandigarh. Mention of persons whose names figured in the draw not made public for reasons best known to OPs. Further in the draw of lots held on 25.07.2015 at Hotel JW Marriot, Sector 35, Chandigarh, it was announced that Plot No. 82 M allotted in the name of complainant. Intimation in this respect was given to complainant vide letter dated 03.08.2015 sent by OPs. OPs demanded Rs.75,000/- towards EDC, Rs.1.00 lakh towards IDC through letter dated 03.08.2015. Complainant approached OPs for confirmation of location of plot allotted to her and on that OPs disclosed that the said plot would fall in Phase-2 of their project. Phase-2 of the project is at distance of approximately 1 KM. away from Phase-1 and the site of Phase-2 still seems to be agriculture land. Possession of plot was to be handed over by OPs to complainant within 2 years of registration, but even after lapse of 5 years, possession has not been delivered. Moreover, complainant was registered for allotment of plot in Phase-1 of the project but she has been allotted plot in Phase-2, which is not acceptable to complainant and that is why legal notice dated 01.06.2016 was got issued for refund of the amount alongwith interest @ 14% per annum, but no effect. So by pleading deficiency in service and adoption of unfair trade practice by OPs, prayer made for directing OPs to refund the received amount of Rs.11,55,000/- with interest @ 14% per annum from the date the amount was credited in their account. Compensation for mental harassment and agony of Rs.4.00 lakhs and litigation expenses of Rs.25,000/- more claimed. Even prayer made for summoning the entire record of OPs pertaining to registration, details of price, details of plots, draw of lots and submission of accounts etc.
2. Initially power of attorney was filed by Shri Ram Yash Verma, Advocate on behalf of OPs, but thereafter neither reply filed and nor the cost of adjournment paid and as such right of OPs to file written version was struck off vide orders dated 24.11.2016.
3. Complainant to prove her case tendered in evidence her affidavit Ex.CW-1/1 alongwith documents Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-24 and thereafter closed evidence. None appeared for OPs since from 01.06.2017 continuously and as such OPs were proceeded against ex-parte.
4. Arguments of counsel for complainant heard and records gone through.
5. Contents of affidavit Ex.CW-1/1 of complainant alongwith copy of terms and conditions of allotment Ex.C-1 establishes that complainant became member of OP society. Ex.C-2 to Ex.C-10 are receipts showing payment of different amounts at different intervals by complainant with OP society. Total of amounts mentioned in the receipts Ex.C-2 to Ex.C-10 claimed to be Rs.11,55,000/-. So complainant able to establish that she has deposited Rs.11,55,000/- with OP society after becoming member of the OP society. Some of the amounts were deposited by complainant after receipt of letters Ex.C-11 to Ex.C-15. Receipt Ex.C-16 also shows deposit of Rs.1,90,000/- by complainant with OP society. Even Ex.C-17 shows deposit of Rs.1,60,000/-. Both on Ex.C-16 and Ex.C-17, it is mentioned that registration is for first draw and second list updation. Ex.C-18 the letter dated 13.08.2015 shows as if plot No.82-M in Sector 110-11-12 of 100 sq. yards allotted to complainant. Letter Ex.C-15 shows as if OP No.1 professed through OP No.2 that lay out plan of the scheme has been approved by Punjab Govt. authorities because of deposit of EDC charges and bank guarantee. Even through Ex.C-15 it was informed by OPs to complainant as if letter of intent has been issued in favour of OP society. Ex.C-14 is letter through which complainant was conveyed as if promoters license has been restored in favour of OP society, but Ex.C-13 is letter showing as if OP society has got all the approvals and the allotment is at final stage. So certainly this documentary evidence available on record establishes that complainant has deposited Rs.11,50,000/- in all with OPs on assurance that promoters license and other approvals from the concerned authorities for initiating the project in question have already been obtained by the OPs. However, complainant through affidavit Ex.CW-1/1 and notice Ex.C-20 sent through registered post claimed as if possession not handed over despite assurance to hand over the same within 2 years. Rather it is claimed that the development work on the site has not been started, but the site underneath the project in question is still agricultural land. Postal receipts Ex.C-21 and Ex.C-22 alongwith registered covers Ex.C-23 and Ex.C-24 also produced on record by complainant to establish as if registered notices were sent to OPs by complainant for forwarding legal notice Ex.C-20. As act of professing of development of project and handing over of possession of the residential plot is an unfair trade practice in this case because development work not carried out resulting in non delivery of possession within stipulated period of two years and as such certainly complainant entitled for refund of the paid amount with interest.
6. Clause-5 of terms and conditions contained in Ex.C-1 states that physical possession of the plot to be handed over not later than two years of registration/requisition. Registration of complainant as member took place on 10.06.2011 on deposit of Rs.5,000/- as membership fee vide receipt Ex.C-2 and as such if this term taken into consideration, then this means that possession was to be handed over by 10.06.2013. However, site in question has not been developed, despite the fact that development charges claimed from complainant alongwith price of plot in question and as such it is obvious that OPs adopted unfair trade practice. It is not a case in which complainant seeking refund of paid amount voluntarily, but it is a case in which refund sought due to non delivery of possession for more than 5 years even after payment of almost full amount of the sale consideration. In fact the total price of the plot was Rs.10,00,000/-, but complainant paid Rs.11,55,000/- and as such fault exclusively lies with OPs in not abiding by the terms and conditions contained in Ex.C-1 regarding handing over of physical possession of the plot within two years from the date of registration/requisition. It is not a case of seeking voluntary refund of the paid amount and as such Clause-4 of Ex.C-1 is not applicable to the facts of the present case, but Clause-5 of Ex.C-1 is applicable in the given set of circumstances of this case. So complainant entitled to refund of the paid amount with interest @ 12% per annum w.e.f. the date of filing of complaint namely 21.06.2016 till payment because refund for the first time sought through issue of notice Ex.C-20 dated 01.06.2016 but said notices received returned back by complainant. Registered covers Ex.C-23 and Ex.C-24 in this respect are produced on record. Complainant also entitled to compensation for mental agony and harassment as well as litigation expenses.
7. As a sequel of above discussion, complaint allowed with direction to OPs to refund the received amount of Rs.11,55,000/- with interest @ 12% per annum with effect from the date of filing of complaint namely 21.06.2016 till payment. Compensation for mental harassment and agony of Rs.20,000/- and litigation expenses of Rs.5,000/- more allowed in favour of complainant and against the OPs. Payment of these amounts of compensation and litigation expenses be made within 30 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of order. Certified copies be supplied to the parties as per rules. File be indexed and consigned to record room.
Announced
March 07, 2018.
(G.K. Dhir)
President
(Amrinder Singh Sidhu) Member
(Mrs. Natasha Chopra)
Member
