STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

U.T., CHANDIGARH

M/s Omaxe Chandigarh Extension Developers Limited, SCO No.143-144, Sector 8-C, Chandigarh, through its Managing Director, now through its authorized representative namely Sh. Harsh Bhargave.

……Appellant/Opposite Party

V e r s u s

Sukhpreet Singh Kang, House No.2103, Sector 66, Mohali, through his father and General Power of Attorney  Holder S.Manjit Singh Kang.

 Appeal under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

BEFORE:  

Argued by:

PER JUSTICE SHAM SUNDER (RETD.), PRESIDENT

“In view of the foregoings, we are of the opinion that the complainant has proved his case against the OP. Therefore, the complaint stands allowed. The OP is directed to refund to the complainant the amount of Rs.14.00 lacs along with interest @9% p.a. from the date of deposit i.e. w.e.f. 12.9.2011 (Ann.C-2) till its actual payment, apart from paying litigation cost of Rs.15,000/-.

This order be complied with by the OP within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order, failing which it shall be liable to refund the said amount of Rs.14.00 lacs along with interest @12% p.a. from the date of deposit i.e. w.e.f. 12.9.2011 (Ann.C-2) till its actual payment, besides paying litigation cost as aforesaid.”

2.           The facts, in brief, are that It was stated that the family members of the complainant, received a letter dated 24.01.2013 from the Opposite Party, vide which it was informed that booking of the said plot, had been cancelled, on the ground of non-payment of the timely installments, in respect of the same.  It was further stated that, at the time of booking the complainant gave a partially filled application form, to the Opposite Party, and he was supplied a copy of the same (application form), as also the terms and conditions appended thereto only.  It was further stated that the Opposite Party, neversupplied any payment schedule, to the complainant. It was further stated that the complainant never received any demand notice for payment, from the Opposite Party, after booking of the said plot.  It was further stated that there was It was further Moreover, there was no clear cut time mentioned for handing over possession of the plot, in favour of the complainant.  It was further stated that when the matter was taken up with the Opposite Party, its Officials stated that the amount deposited by him, towards the said plot, would be refunded, after deducting 20% of the earnest money. Ultimately, a legal notice dated 03.05.2013 was served upon the Opposite Party, to refund the entire amount, deposited by the complainant, but to no avail. It was further stated that the aforesaid acts of the Opposite Party, amounted to deficiency, in rendering service, as also indulgence into unfair trade practice. When the grievance of the complainant, was not redressed, left with no alternative, a complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter to be called as the Act only), was filed, directing the Opposite Party, to refund the amount of Rs.14 lacs, alongwith interest @9% P.A., from the date of deposit; pay compensation, to the tune of Rs.2 lacs, for mental agony and physical harassment; and cost of litigation, to the tune of Rs.55,000/-.

3.           

4.           

5.            

6.           

7.            

8.            

9.           

10.         This letter was addressed to the complainant, at the address given by him. Annexure R-4 is the courier receipt, vide which this letter was sent to the complainant, by the Opposite Party. No doubt, on the courier receipt, the complete address of the complainant was not written, yet, that did not mean that that this reminder was not sent to him. Even, it is evident from Annexure R-2 letter dated 06.03.2012, that the same was addressed to the complainant, vide which it was informed that draw for the allotment of plots, shall be held on 17.03.2012 at Hotel Hometel Chandigarh, Plot No.147-148, Industrial Area, Phase-I, Chandigarh, at 11.30 A.M. onwards. The complainant was asked to participate in the allotment process, or could authorize somebody, on his behalf, to do so. It was also intimated, vide this letter that he had been already informed about this, vide letter dated 03.02.2012. On Annexure R-2, photo-impression of the postal receipt is embossed. In this receipt also, the complete address of the complainant was not given. It appears that the Postal Authorities and the Courier Agencies, do not record the complete address of the addressee, on the receipts issued by them. They apparently only write the name of the addressee, as also the place, where the addressee is residing, instead of his full address thereon. This fact is further evident from the postal receipt Annexure C-7, vide which the legal notice Annexure C-6 was sent by the complainant, to the Opposite Party. It is evident, from the said receipt that the complete address of the Opposite Party, was not written therein. In photocopy of this postal receipt Annexure C-7, it was only written “To M/s Omaxe Chd. Ext. DE, Chandigarh” whereas, the complete address of the Opposite Party was “Omaxe Chandigarh Extension Developers Pvt. Limited, SCO No.143-144, First Floor, Sector 8-C, Madhya Marg, Chandigarh-160008”.

11.           right, in forfeiting   

12.            

13.            

14.        

15.        

                         The appellant/opposite party shall pay Rs.11,20,000/- i.e. (Rs.14 lacs minus (-) Rs.2,80,000/- being 20% of the earnest money), to the respondent/complainant, within a period of 45 days, from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order, on completing the formalities by him (respondent/complainant), as mentioned in

16.        

17.        

Pronounced.

January 20, 2014

Sd/-

[JUSTICE SHAM SUNDER (RETD.)]

PRESIDENT

Sd/-

(DEV RAJ)

MEMBER

Rg