DATE OF DISPOSAL: 01.02.2024

PER:   SRI SATISH KUMAR PANIGRAHI, PRESIDENT

The fact of the case in brief is that the complainant has filed this Consumer complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 alleging deficiency in service by the Opposite Parties (in short O.Ps) and for redressal of her grievance before this Commission. 

2. The complainant is a house wife and being influent by one Shyam Das and Sri R.Alleya Reddy of village Sindhigam, the complainant agreed to purchase the plots as per detail stated herein under:

TABLE - 1

The aforesaid plots are belonging to the O.P. as per cause title and agreed to be sold & purchase for Rs.7,95,000/-. Accordingly, one sale agreement was prepared and signed by the complainant and O.Ps along with witnesses named at para-1. The sale agreement was signed by all the parties on 11.1.2012 and 5.5.2012 for sale of the aforesaid plots. On the sale agreement dated 11.1.2012 the O.P. received Rs.4,95,000/- only towards advance payment against total of Rs.7,95,000/-. In the sale agreement dated 11.1.2012 in presence of the witnesses, it is stated at page-4 therein that since the O.Ps belong to SC will obtain permission from the Sub-Collector, Berhampur and would register the same within seven days of the permission. Again another sale agreement was signed on 5.5.2012 wherein at page-2 have agreed on receipt of Rs.3,00,000/- out of total of Rs.7,65,000/- and to receive the balance of Rs.30,000/- at the time of Registration before the Sub-Registrar, Berhampur. In response to the said agreements, the O.Ps made application before the Sub-collector, Berhampur for permission U/S 22 of OLR Act. Basing on the aforesaid petitions the Sub-collector, Berhampur issued general proclamation on dated 14.1.2019.  In spite of the above the O.Ps have neither obtained permission from Sub- Collector, Berhampur nor came toward for registration of the plots indicated above. Finding no other alternative, the complainant contacted the O.Ps for refund of the money received i.e. Rs.7,65,000/-. Since the O.Ps did not come forward to settle the matter, the complainant was forced to issue legal notice through the advocate on dated 22.10.23019. The aforesaid advocate notice was received in time by the O.Ps as reveals from the acknowledgment receipts. Alleging deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps the complainant prayed to direct the O.Ps to refund Rs.7,65,000/- along with interest, compensation of Rs.50,000/- for harassment and mental agony, Rs.7500/- towards the cost of the litigation in the best interest of justice.

3. Notices were issued against the Opposite Parties but they neither choose to appear nor filed any written version. Hence all the O.Ps are set exparte on dated 03.08.2022.

         4. On the date of hearing the Ld. Counsel for the Complainant was present and heard. The Commission perused the complaint petition, written argument of the Complainant and materials available in the case record.

It is apparent from the case record that, both parties executed a sale agreement with their will and consent which was enforceable under law. The opposite parties agreed to hand over the land for a consideration amount of Rs.7,95,000/-. Accordingly, the sale agreement was signed by all the parties on 11.1.2012 and 5.5.2012 for the sale of the plots in question. On the sale agreement dated 11.1.2012, the O.P. received Rs.4,95,000/- only towards advance payment against a total of Rs.7,95,000/-. In the sale agreement dated 11.1.2012 in the presence of the witnesses the opposite parties received the rest of the amount from the complainant. to transfer the land, the opposite parties filed the appropriate application vide No.: OLR Case No.;13/2019 under OLR Act before the Ld. Sub. Collector-cum-Sub. Divisional Magistrate, Berhampur Sub-Division at Berhampur. The concerned authority has also issued notice on 16.01.2019/No.;557 and also issued notice to the Tehsildar, Konisi for publication of notice in the locality and return the enquiry report. But no effective report was reached to the SDM, Berhampur SD within the stipulated period. To make it fruitful, the opposite parties did not make any efforts on the said application and remained silent over the contract deliberately. The Complainant in constraint to get back the amount from the opposite parties being harassed since 2012 issued an Advocate Notice to all the opposite parties before filing of the present case but nobody paid any heed to that notice. In the instant case, the opposite parties have received the entire consideration amount from the complainant while executing the sale agreement in the presence of the witness on the aforesaid days.

It is manifest from the case record that, the opposite parties remained silent over the complaint of the Complainant whereas the notices were sufficient. The legal principle is that silence may sometimes amount to admission of fact. In Union of India v. Prakash P. Hinduja (2003):- This case dealt with customs duty evasion, and the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India observed that when a person, upon questioning, fails to provide any explanation or response, it can be inferred that they do not have any valid explanation, and their silence can be used against them. Further it establishes a presumption that when evidence is deliberately suppressed by a party the court may presume that such evidence if produced would be unfavorable to that party.

The Commission considering the settled law in U.N. Krishnamurthy (Since Deceased) thr. Lrs. versus A.M. Krishnamurthy reported in 2022 that Live Law (SC) 588 allowed the complaint against the opposite parties. The opposite parties are directed to refund the amount of Rs. 7 65 000/- to the complainant along with interest at the rate of 6% pa from the date of receipt of the above amount from the complainant  till the actual date of payment and further the opposite parties are directed to pay litigation cost of Rs.7000/- to the complainant within 45 days from the date of receipt of the Order failing which the Complainant is at liberty to recover all the dues carries 12% pa from the date of filing of the case i.e. on dtd: 05.12.2019 from the opposite parties in accordance to the Consumer Protection Act 2019.

This case is disposed of accordingly.

The Judgment be uploaded on the www.confonet.nic.in for the perusal of the parties.

A certified copy of this Judgment be provided to all the parties free of cost as mandated by the Consumer Protection Act 2019 or they may download same from the www.confonet.nic.in to treat the same as if copy of the order received from this Commission.

The file is to be consigned to the record room along with a copy of this Judgment.

Pronounced on 01.02.2024.