Complaint filed on: 15-03-2010 <br /> Disposed on: 02-09-2010<br /> <br /> BEFORE THE BANGALORE IV ADDITIONAL DISTRICT <br /> CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,<br /> BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT, NO.8, SAHAKARA BHAVAN, CUNNINGHAM ROAD, BANGALORE – 560 052 <br /> <br /> C.C.No.574/2010<br /> DATED THIS THE 2nd SEPTEMBER 2010<br /> <br /> PRESENT<br /> <br /> SRI.D.KRISHNAPPA., PRESIDENT<br /> SRI.GANGANARASAIAH., MEMBER<br /> SMT. ANITA SHIVAKUMAR. K, MEMBER<br /> <br /> Complainant: - <br /> Smt.S.K.Padmaja C/o. <br /> Sri.S.K.Ramarao,<br /> No.19, 2nd Main, KEB Layout, <br /> Vivekanandanagar, <br /> Bangalore-85<br /> Represented by her GPA<br /> Holder Sri.S.K.Ramarao <br /> <br /> V/s<br /> <br /> Opposite parties: - <br /> 1. The Bangalore City Chickpet <br /> House Building Co-operative<br /> Society Ltd, K.V.Temple Street<br /> Bangalore-53<br /> Reptd, by its President <br /> 2. The Bangalore City Chickpet <br /> House Building Co-operative<br /> Society Ltd, K.V.Temple Street<br /> Bangalore-53<br /> Reptd, by its Secretary<br /> <br /> <br /> O R D E R<br /> <br /> SRI. D.KRISHNAPPA., PRESIDENT., <br /> <br /> The Grievance of the complainant against the opposite parties [hereinafter called as OPs for short) in brief is that, the Op is a registered society doing business of forming layout for allotment of sites to its members. That she applied for allotment of a site measuring 30ft X 40ft and had paid Rs.1,28,400/- to the Ops. The Ops have issued allotment letter allotting site No.27 measuring 30ft X 40ft at Amanikere, Bangalore, though, she had applied for allotment of a site in Thindlu project. That the Ops thereafter delaying registration of allotted site wrote several letters and promised that registration of site would be done by December 2001 or June 2002. But they failed keep up their promise. Then the Ops on 16-10-2004 wrote an another letter assuring allotment of site demanded additional amount of Rs.25,000/- which is against the original contract. Then the Ops on 26-2-2008 wrote another letter asking her consent to allot site at Koggenahalli, but she declined to take that site insisting upon to provide site no.27. Then, when she did not receive any positive response, during December 2008 sent a letter to the Ops demanding repayment of money paid by her. Thus, the Ops have failed to provide a site to her despite receipt of sital value and therefore has prayed for a direction to the Ops to refund her money with interest at 12% per annum. <br /> <br /> 2. Ops have appeared through their advocate and filed their version, contending that the complaint is barred by limitation and stated that the Government had acquired land at Thindlu village for them. But land owners when challenged the acquisition before the High Court which quashed the acquisition which order was confirmed by the Supreme Court and Supreme court though had directed the government to pay back the land costs to them, but yet they have not received the cost of the land and stated because of that reasons Thindlu layout could not be done. Ops have admitted receipt of Rs.1,28,400/- from the complainant and further stated that they had allotted a site in Amanikere layout but because some litigation they also could not pursue Amanikere layout and thereby exhibit their inability in completing the projects have prayed for dismissal of the complaint. <br /> <br /> 3. In the course of enquiry into the complaint, the power of attorney holder of the complainant and the 2nd OP has filed their affidavit evidence reproducing what they have stated in their respective complaint and version. The complainant alongwith the complaint has produced a copy of GPA executed in favour of power of attorney holder, produced copies of receipt and copies of letters exchanged between herself and Ops. Ops have produced a copy of order passed by the High Court of Karnataka in write petition. We have heard the counsel for both parties and perused the records.<br /> <br /> 4. On the above contentions following points for determination arise.<br /> 1. Whether the complainant proves that Ops have <br /> caused deficiency in their service in not either <br /> allotting a site by way of final allotment or in not <br /> refunding her money?<br /> 2. To what reliefs, the complainant is entitled to?<br /> <br /> 5. Our findings are as under:<br /> Point no.1: In the affirmative<br /> Point no.2: See the final Order<br /> <br /> REASONS<br /> 6. Answer on Point No.1: Because of certain admission made by the Ops in their version, affidavit evidence and also in their letters the matter do not detain us as long. Ops have admitted payments from the complainant at two stages amounting to Rs.1,28,400/-. They have also admitted issue of provisional allotment letter allotting site no.27 of Amanikere in favour of the complainant. Ops have not disputed that they had promised allotment of site at Thindlu village and latter on at Amanikere layout. But they have expressed their inability in not being able to complete both the projects by contending that lands acquired by them for Thindlu project were quashed by the High court and confirmed by the Supreme Court and Amanikere lands are held up in litigation. <br /> <br /> 7. Ops have not denied their liability to refund the complainant’s money though they have stated that money they had deposited with the Government as the cost of the land acquired at Thindlu village was not refunded to them by the government and a write petition was filed in that regard but it is not their case that for any legal reasons they are not able to repay the complainant’s money. Thus the OP can not avoid refund of the complainant’s money with interest. The complainant has also claimed refund of her money with reasonable rate of interest at 12% per annum for which the complainant in our view is entitled. Therefore we hold that the Ops not repaying the complainant’s money amounts to deficiency and we therefore answer point no.1 in the affirmative and pass the following order.<br /> <br /> ORDER<br /> <br /> Complaint is allowed, Ops are jointly and severally held liable, are directed to refund Rs.1,28,400/- to the complainant with interest at 12% per annum from the date of respective payments till the date of payment. <br /> <br /> Ops shall refund that amount with interest within 45 days from the date of this order.<br /> <br /> Ops shall also pay cost of Rs.4000/- to the complainant. <br /> <br /> Dictated to the Stenographer, Got it transcribed and corrected, Pronounced on the Open Forum on this 2nd September 2010.<br /> <br /> Member Member President<br />