Haryana

StateCommission

A/1075/2015

BPTP LTD. - Complainant(s)

Versus

SURESH PAREEK - Opp.Party(s)

HEMANT SAINI

09 May 2017

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, HARYANA, PANCHKULA.

 

                                                First Appeal No.1075 of 2015

                                                          Date of Institution: 17.12.2015                         Date of Decision: 09.05.2017

 

B.P.T.P. ltd. M-11, Middle circle, Connaught Circus, New Delhi-110001 tyhrough its authorized Representative Mr. Vipin Saroha.

…..Appellant

                                      VERSUS

Suresh Pareek, S/o Shri Shyam Sunder Pareek R/o H.No.428, Sector-11-D DLF, Faridabad (Haryana).

          …..Respondent

 

CORAM:             Mr. R.K.Bishnoi, Judicial Member.

                   Mrs. Urvashi Agnihotri, Member.                                   

For the parties:  Mr.Hemant Saini, Advocate counsel for the appellant.

None for the respondent.

 

O R D E R

 

R.K.BISHNOI, JUDICIAL MEMBER :-

As per complainant he booked villa measuring 150 sq. yard and deposited Rs.Six lacs vide receipt Nos10489 and 10495 dated 30.01.2006.  It was assured that possession would be delivered within one year, but, till date possession was not delivered.  O.P. further received  Rs.4,47,225/- on 07.05.2008. Vide letter dated 18.09.2008 O.P. allotted villa No.G5-13 and demanded Rs.2,36,250/-.  He raised objection about that demand and asked to deliver possession which was assured in very short time. Due to non delivery of possession he suffered great hardship. He requested time and again to deliver possession, but, to no use.  O.P. be directed to deliver possession of aforesaid villa and to pay compensation to the tune of Rs.Two lacs for mental harassment etc. and Rs.11,000/- as litigation expenses.

2.      O.P. filed reply admitting allotment of villa, but, alleged that he did not deposit any amount after allotment. He did not pay Rs.2,36,250/- demanded from him. Demand letters were sent to him on 18.09.2008 for Rs.2,36,250/-, dated 15.09.2010 for Rs.2,80,799/-, and dated 23.11.2010 for Rs.5,17,049/-, but, to no use.  Final opportunity was afforded vide letter dated 11.02.2011, but, without any result. Another last opportunity was granted vide letter dated 14.03.2011 to deposit balance amount within 15 days but, he did not come forward.  So his booking was deemed terminated vide that letter. The lapse was on the part of the complainant and not them.

3.      After hearing both the parties, learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Faridabad (In short “District Forum”) allowed the complaint  vide impugned order dated 24.09.2015 and directed as under:-

“Opposite party is directed to allot a villa of same size in the same locality to the complainant after receipt of outstanding amount alongwith interest @ 9% from the respective due dates of installments from the complainant or if aforesaid villa is not available then to pay market value of said villa to the complainant within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order.

Opposite party is further directed to pay Rs.5500/- as compensation on account of mental agony and harassment as well as Rs.2200/- on account of litigation expenses to the complainant.”

4.      Feeling aggrieved therefrom O.P. has preferred this appeal.

5.      Arguments of only counsel for appellant are heard because nobody appeared on behalf of respondent since two dates and matter is pertaining to the year 2015.  File perused.

6.      It is argued by learned counsel for appellant-O.P. that after cancellation of allotment cheque of Rs.9,58,631/- was sent to complainant alongwith letter dated 10.08.2011.  It was entitled to deduct amount from the sum paid by complainant as agreed in between the parties.  Learned District Forum has directed to refund the amount at the market rate, whereas on the other hand it has been ordered that villa be allotted at the initial rate without demanding interest on the balance payment, which is altogether wrong. So impugned order be set aside and complaint be dismissed.

7.      As per evidence available on the file neither the averments of complainant can be accepted in toto nor of O.P. Allotment letter is dated 24.12.2005 wherein it was mentioned that if allotment is not made within one year then complainant will be entitled for refund of the amount deposited by him @ 9% per annum. In this way the allotment was to be made upto 24.12.2006, but, in the present case the allotment was made vide letter dated  18.09.2008, copy of which is Ex.C-4.  It shows O.P. also failed to allot villa as agreed in between them. Vide this letter O.P. demanded Rs.2,36,250/- from complainant, whereas he had already deposited Rs.10,47,225/-. As per clause C of aforesaid agreement  O.P. was liable to pay 09% interest on the amount paid by him, but, no such adjustment is visible from Ex.C-4.  It is no-where mentioned therein that interest payable to him was already adjusted. In this way there is default on the part of the O.P. In such a situation it cannot be alleged that it was entitled to deduct any amount from payment already made by complainant. Complainant cannot be blamed squarely as far as this case is concerned.  In these circumstances he can ask for refund of the amount deposited by him alongwith interest @ 09% per annum from the date of deposit till realization and not the present value of villa as opined by learned District forum.

8.      As a sequel to above discussion relevant portion of impugned order, as mentioned above, is modified to the effect that if villa in some locality is available then the same may be allotted to complainant at the same rate after receipt of outstanding amount alongwith interest @ 09% per annum from the respective dates of installments and if  no such villa is available then to refund the amount already deposited by him alongwith interest @ 09% per annum from the date of payment till realization.  O.P. is also held liable to pay compensation qua mental harassment and litigation expenses as opined by learned District Forum. With this modification the appeal stands disposed off.

9.      The statutory amount of Rs.25,000/- deposited at the time of filing the appeal be refunded to the appellant against proper receipt and identification in accordance with rules.

 

May 09th, 2017

Mrs.Urvashi Agnihotri, Member, Addl.Bench

R.K.Bishnoi, Judicial Member Addl.Bench

S.K.