CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM – X

GOVERNMENT OF N.C.T. OF DELHI

Udyog Sadan, C – 22 & 23, Institutional Area

(Behind Qutub Hotel)

New Delhi – 110 016

Case No.103/2012

SH. SANDEEP SINGH RAWAT

S/O SH. B.S. RAWAT

R/O FLAT NO.17, MAHABHADRA KALI APARTMENTS,

PLOT NO.6, DWARKA, SECTOR-13,

NEW DELHI-110075

…………. COMPLAINANT                                                                                     

                                                VS.

M/S SUPERTECH LIMITED

REGD. OFFICE AT:-

1114, HEMKUNT CHAMBERS,

89, NEHRU PLACE,

NEW DELHI-110019

      …………..RESPONDENT

                                                                                             Date of Order:13.07.2015

O R D E R

A.S. Yadav – President

            The case of the complainant is that he booked a flat on 03.12.2011 measuring area 1150 sq. ft. in the project of OP at Noida @ Rs.3217/- per sq. ft. through Mr. Rohit, an agent of OP and paid a sum of Rs.3,75,705/- vide cheque No.106679.  Complainant received a demand letter which shows that the price of the flat was @ Rs.3420/- sq. ft. and not Rs.3217/-.  This fact was not known to the complainant earlier and he was misled by the agent of the OP.  As per the letter dated 30.12.2011 the booking amount was 10% of the total amount and as such booking amount comes Rs.403053/- whereas OP has received Rs.375705/- and demanded a balance amount of Rs.27348/-.  The complainant has written a number of letters to OP for refund of amount but the same was not refunded on the ground that it was not made known to him that the price of flat was @ Rs.3420/- sq. ft rather he was informed that the price was @ Rs.3217/- per sq. ft. 

OP in the written submission has stated that allegations are against Mr. Rohit, agent.  It is stated that Mr. Rohit is not the agent of OP and OP has never informed complainant that the price was @ Rs.3217/- per sq. ft.  In fact the price was Rs.3240/- per sq. ft. that is why complainant was asked to pay balance amount of Rs.27348/- towards booking amount.  It is stated that the complainant in the present case at the maximum can claim for the refund of the amount deposited with OP which may be refunded by OP as per terms of said booking form.  Apart from the said principle amount, complainant is not entitled for any amount as there is no deficiency on the part of OP.  It is further stated that the complaint is bad for non joinder of necessary parties.  The flat was jointly purchased by the complainant and his wife Mrs. Jyoti Gusai hence she is also the necessary party of this case.  Besides the present dispute has occurred due to property dealer Mr. Rohit who he is a necessary party.

We have heard Ld. counsel for parties and gone through the record carefully.

There was no reason for the complainant to assume for himself that prie of the flat was @ Rs.3217/- per sq. ft. unless it was told to him.  Why would complainant deposit a sum of Rs.375705/- towards 10% of the sale price calculated on the basis of base sale price(BSP) of Rs.3217/- sq. ft.  Had it been within his knowledge that the price was Rs.3420/- he would have definitely paid aforesaid amount.  There is no reason to disbelieve the complainant that he has come to know about the aforesaid price only when he was asked to pay the balance amount of Rs.27348/-.  OP has not placed on record any document that they have informed the complainant that the BSP was Rs.3420/- at the time when he received the cheque for Rs.375705/- from the complainant.  OP has not placed agreement on the record bearing the signature of the complainant showing that he was informed that BSP was Rs.3420/- per sq. ft. 

The complainant is entitled for refund of amount paid by him to OP.  So far as non joinder of necessary party Mrs. Jyoti Gusain and Mr. Rohit, the so called agent of OP, is concerned, it is not in dispute that the cheque has been signed by the complainant and the receipt have been issued in the name of the complainant hence complainant was competent to the complainant.  The present complaint filed by the complainant is very much maintainable.  So far as non joinder of Mr. Rohit is concerned, he is not a necessary party.  The amount has been paid to OP, the flat has been booked in the project of OP and demand has been raised by OP for the payment of balance booking amount. 

The complainant is entitled for refund of Rs.375705/- alongwith interest @ 9% p.a. from date of deposit of amount to OP.  Complainant is also entitled for compensation of Rs.5,000/- as well as litigation expenses of Rs.5000/-.

Let the order be complied within one month of the receipt thereof.  The complaint stands disposed of accordingly.

Copy of order be sent to the parties, free of cost, and thereafter file be consigned to record room.

         (EHTESHAM-UL-HAQ)                                               (A.S. YADAV)

                  MEMBER                                                              PRESIDENT