Haryana

Sonipat

205/2014

RAJENDER SINGH NANDLAL S/O UDE SINGH - Complainant(s)

Versus

TDI INFRASTRUCTURE LTD. - Opp.Party(s)

REJENDER SINGH

02 Jan 2015

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SONEPAT.

 

                                Complaint No.205 of 2014

                                Instituted on:22.08.2014.

                                Date of order:18.05.2015

 

Rajender Singh Nandal son of Udey Singh, resident of 47, Vashundhra Apartment, Sector 9, Rohini, Delhi/VPO Bohar, district Rohtak.

                                           ...Complainant.

 

                        Versus

 

 

TDI Infrastructure Ltd. through its Managing Director, Regd. Office at Vandana Building Upper Ground Floor, 11 Tolstoy Marg, Connaught Place, New Delhi-110001.

                                           ...Respondent.

 

COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 12 OF

THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,1986

 

Argued by: Complainant in person.

           Sh. Virender Tyagi Adv. for respondents.

          

 

BEFORE-  NAGENDER SINGH, PRESIDENT.

        SMT.PRABHA WATI, MEMBER.

        D.V.RATHI, MEMBER.

 

O R D E R

 

          Complainant has filed the present complaint against the respondents alleging therein that he booked a three bed room flat measuring 1625 Sq. feet at the rate of Rs.1725/- per sq. feet on 19.3.2006 in Kingsbury Apartment, TDI Kundli, Sonepat and the complainant has deposited the huge amount with the respondents from time to time.  The complainant was allotted flat no.V-1/201 and allotment letter was issued to him.  It is alleged that no construction linked demand was ever raised by the respondents from 19.3.2006 to 7.7.2010.  Upto 7.7.2010 only one demand of Rs.4,49,040/- was made from the complainant towards sale consideration on 23.5.2007 which was paid by the complainant. In 6/2010, one of the official of the respondents told that soil sample of the land of U and V block had failed and no multistory building could be built on the land of U and V blocks.   The complainant accepted the offer of the respondents regarding allotment of flat no.302 in W4 tower and the complainant was asked to deposit Rs.802099/-  and the complainant  paid the said amount vide cheque.  Upto 17.6.2010 the respondents have grabbed Rs.19,51,139/- from the complainant.  At the end of 2011, the complainant visited the site at Kundli, and he was surprised to see that the construction work in block V had been started but the construction of W4 tower in which the complainant’s flat no.W4/302 was situated, was still upto 7^th floor and no construction work was being done in W block.  The complainant has paid Rs.1,49,500/- to the respondents on 16.12.2010 but the service tax of Rs.8490/- was not paid by the complainant.  When the construction was not started after 7^th floor in W4 tower the complainant wrote a letter to the respondents on 26.10.2012.  However, on 26.11.2012 one of the official of the respondents told that the reminder for Rs.84449/- was sent to the complainant by mistake and the complainant was to pay Rs.8500/- and thus, the complainant has paid Rs.8500/- to the respondents on 26.11.2012.  On 6.2.2013, the respondents again sent a demand letter of Rs.1,54,766/- towards installment i.e. start of 9^th floor though the top floor had already been constructed and upto 30.3.2013 the respondents have grabbed Rs.22,63,906/- from the complainant without doing any construction work after 7^th floor in W4 Tower.  In 6/2013, the complainant requested the respondents to return his deposited amount with interest, but this request has not brought any fruitful result.  The respondents have issued the cancellation letter on 16.12.2013.  It is further submitted that in the month of January, February and March the complainant visited the site of W4 block and found that the construction of W4 tower was still upto 7^th floor.  On 7.4.2014, the complainant went to the respondents’ office where Mr. Vij told the complainant that if he is ready to deposit the demanded amount of Rs.9,13,468/- alongwith penalty of 18% per annum, then the cancellation notice of his flat would be revoked.  Despite this, the respondents have not done anything towards the construction of W4 tower in which the complainant’s flat no.W4/302 was situated and that amounts to a grave deficiency in service on the part of the respondents. So, he has come to this Forum and has filed the present complaint with the prayer to direct the respondent to provide him the account statement, revoke the cancellation letter and to hand over the possession of the flat no.W-4-302 alongwith interest on the deposited amount at the rate of 3% per month on the amount of Rs.22,63,905/- and also to pay compensation to the tune of Rs.10 lacs for harassment and cost of litigation.

2.        The respondent appeared and filed the reply submitting therein that initially the complainant was allotted flat no.V-1-201  but later-on, on the request of the complainant, the allotment was shifted in Tower W and the complainant was allotted flat no.W-4-302 as the construction work in the said tower was at advance stage.  The respondent never assured to complete the construction work or giving possession of flat within 2-3 years to the complainant.  The respondent has denied the fact that there was any defect in the soil of Tower V.  The demand of Rs.802099/- was raised from the complainant as per status of construction of Tower W.   The construction work of tower-V is now at final stage.  The construction of the Tower-W was continuously done by the respondent and the construction work of the said tower was completed and possession has been offered to various allottees.  The demand letter issued to the complainant is correct and as per status of construction at the relevant time.  The pleadings of the complainant are self contradictory as  at one place, the complainant has admitted that at the time of allotment of flat no.W-4-302 the construction had reached upto 7^th floor, but at the other place, the complainant has alleged that no construction was done in 11/2011.  The construction in the said tower was regularly done and the same has been completed.  The flat no.V1-201 which was left by the complainant was allotted to some body else.  The complainant is not entitled for any interest.  It was a construction linked plan and no time limit was stipulated in the application for completion of construction and offer of possession.  Later-on, on the request of the complainant, the amount of interest was waived off and the complainant was allowed to deposit Rs.8500/- only which was earlier demanded from the complainant vide letter dated 30.11.2010.  Further in the letter dated 10.12.2012 it was mentioned that if the amount has already been deposited, the complainant should ignore the same.    The respondent has raised the demand of installments as per status of construction at site.  The respondent has denied the fact that no letter was received by the complainant prior to letter dated 30.9.2013 whereas the complainant himself has placed on the file a demand letter dated 13.9.2013 regarding demand of Rs.685366/-.   The respondent has issued so many letters to the complainant, but the complainant himself did not make any payment. The complainant made last payment of Rs.1,54,766/- on 30.3.2013.  The booking/allotment of flat in favour of the complainant was cancelled vide letter dated 30.11.2013.  In the cancellation letter dated 30.11.2013, it was further conveyed to the complainant to submit the necessary documents to enable the company to process his refund of money (if any) as per company policy. At the time of cancellation the amount of Rs.913468/- was outstanding against the complainant.  The allotment of flat in favour of the complainant was rightly and legally cancelled by the respondent due to non-payment of outstanding dues.   The complainant is not entitled for any relief and compensation and thus, prayed for the dismissal of the present complaint.

3.        We have heard the complainant in person and learned counsel for the respondent at length and we have also gone through the entire relevant material available on the case file carefully & minutely. We have also perused the written arguments submitted by the complainant in support of his case, very carefully and minutely.

4.        Ld. Counsel for the respondent has submitted that initially the complainant was allotted flat no.V-1-201  but later-on, on the request of the complainant, the allotment was shifted in Tower W and the complainant was allotted flat no.W-4-302 as the construction work in the said tower was at advance stage.  The respondent never assured to complete the construction work or giving possession of flat within 2-3 years to the complainant.  The respondent has denied the fact that there was any defect in the soil of Tower V.  The demand of Rs.802099/- was raised from the complainant as per status of construction of Tower W.   The construction work of tower-V is now at final stage.  The construction of the Tower-W was continuously done by the respondent and the construction work of the said tower was completed and possession has been offered to various allottees.  The demand letter issued to the complainant is correct and as per status of construction at the relevant time.  The pleadings of the complainant are self contradictory as  at one place, the complainant has admitted that at the time of allotment of flat no.W-4-302 the construction had reached upto 7^th floor, but at the other place, the complainant has alleged that no construction was done in 11/2011.  The construction in the said tower was regularly done and the same has been completed.  The flat no.V1-201 which was left by the complainant was allotted to some body else.  The complainant is not entitled for any interest.  It was a construction linked plan and no time limit was stipulated in the application for completion of construction and offer of possession.  Later-on, on the request of the complainant, the amount of interest was waived off and the complainant was allotted to deposit Rs.8500/- only which was earlier demanded from the complainant vide letter dated 30.11.2010.  Further in the letter dated 10.12.2012 it was mentioned that if the amount has already been deposited, the complainant should ignore the same.    The respondent has raised the demand of installments as per status of construction at site.  The respondent has denied the fact that no letter was received by the complainant prior to letter dated 30.9.2013 whereas the complainant himself has placed on the file a demand letter dated 13.9.2013 regarding demand of Rs.685366/-.   The respondent has issued so many letters to the complainant, but the complainant himself did not make any payment. The complainant made last payment of Rs.1,54,766/- on 30.3.2013.  The booking/allotment of flat in favour of the complainant was cancelled vide letter dated 30.11.2013.  In the cancellation letter dated 30.11.2013, it was further conveyed to the complainant to submit the necessary documents to enable the company to process his refund of money (if any) as per company policy. At the time of cancellation the amount of Rs.913468/- was outstanding against the complainant.  The allotment of flat in favour of the complainant was rightly and legally cancelled by the respondent due to non-payment of outstanding dues.   The complainant is not entitled for any relief and compensation.

          The complainant in person has also argued his case on the basis of his pleadings, written arguments and the documents placed on record that the respondent officials have played a fraud with the complainant that soil of V Block was found defected and no construction can be made on that place. So, they intentionally allotted him flat in W Block.  But later-on, they also started the construction in V Block.  He has also submitted that the respondent officials sold the flats constructed in V block on higher rates to other persons.  The flats constructed in V block were on prime location.

          He has also submitted that the respondent has not issued any allotment letter regarding the flat no.W-4-302.  He also argued that the complainant is regularly paying the amount of installments since 29.3.2006 and till date, the respondent has not handed over the possession of any flat to the complainant.  He has also submitted that the respondent officials made a false document  i.e. Ex.R3 because he has not signed the request letter for change of flat.  He has requested to prosecute the respondent officials for doing such wrong. The respondent officials without the consent of the complainant has change the flat of the complainant from V block to W block.  He has also submitted that the respondent officials has not constructed the 9^th floor in W block, whereas they have demanded the amount from the complainant for 9^th Floor.  When the complainant inspected the site, only 7^th floor were found constructed in W block.  He has also submitted that there is difference of location of V block and W Block.  The complainant has also submitted that he wrote various letters to the respondent, but none of the letter was responded or replied to by the respondent.

          At the time of arguments, the complainant has submitted that he has deposited approximately Rs.22,63,905/- with the respondent and the respondent be directed to pay interest at the rate of Rs.3% per month and the total amount payable by the respondent to the complainant comes to Rs.69 lacs.  But we find no force in the contention of the complainant regarding grant of interest at the rate of Rs.3% per month on the amount of Rs.22,63,905/-.  However, we allow the present complaint with the directions to the respondent to refund the entire deposit amount to the complainant alongwith interest at the rate of 09% per annum from the date of its deposit till payment or to allot the flat no.W-4-302 to the complainant and to receive the balance amount from the complainant without interest.  The respondent is also directed to compensate the complainant to the tune of Rs.25000/- (Rs.twenty five thousands) for rendering deficient services, for harassment and under the head of litigation expenses.  It is also made clear that if the flat no.W-4-302 is not available with the respondent, in that event, the respondent shall allot the flat to the complainant at the same rate and of the same measurement at some other good location.

          With these observations, findings and directions, the present complaint stands allowed.

          Certified copy of this order be provided to both the parties free of cost.

File be consigned to the record-room.

 

 

(Prabha Wati Member) (DV Rathi Member)     (Nagender Singh-President)

DCDRF, Sonepat.      DCDRF Sonepat         DCDRF, Sonepat.

 

Announced:18.05.2015.