Andhra Pradesh

East Godwari-II at Rajahmundry

CC/31/2015

Kandula Satyanarayana - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Branch Manager, Dream Land ventures Private Limited - Opp.Party(s)

B. Ramesh

17 Dec 2015

ORDER

                                                                                    Date of filing:   02.05.2015

                                                                                                Date of Order: 17.12.2015

 

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER FORUM-II, EAST GODAVARI

DISTRICT AT RAJAHMUNDRY

 

          PRESENT:   Sri A. Madhusudana Rao, M.Com., B.L.,  .. President (FAC)

              Sri S.Bhaskar Rao, M.A., B.L., D.P.M.,    .. Member

                               

           Thursday, the 17^th day of December, 2015

 

C.C.No.31 /2015

Between:-

 

Kandula Satyanarayana, S/o. late Venkata Rao,

Aged 65 years, D.No.85-30-4/1, RTC Colony,

Rajahmundry, East Godavari District.                                                                                               …        Complainant

     

                        And

 

1)  The Branch Manager,

      Dream Land Ventures Private Limited,

      Agri Gold Group of Companies,

      Near Sai Krishna Theatre, Rajahmundry,

      East Godavari District.

 

2)  The Managing Director,

      Agri Gold Limited, Agri Gold Group of

      Companies, D.No.40-6-3, Flat No.6,

      Nimmalagadda, Somasankara Rao Street,

      Old Revenue Colony, Labbipeta, M.G. Road,

      Vijayawada.                                                                                                                            …        Opposite parties

 

 

            This case coming on 11.12.2015 for final hearing before this Forum in the presence of Sri B. Ramesh, Advocate for the complainant and the 1^st opposite party having been set exparte and Sri M.R. Chandra, Advocate for the 2^nd opposite party, and having stood over till this date for consideration, this Forum has pronounced the following:  

 

O R D E R

[Per Sri A. Madhusudana Rao, President (FAC)] 

This is a complaint filed by the complainant U/Sec.12 of Consumer Protection Act 1986 to direct the opposite parties 1 and 2 joint and several liability to pay the claim amount of Rs.3,62,500/- with interest @ 24% p.a. from the date of claim till the discharge of the claim amount and award costs of the complaint.

2.         The case of the complainant is as follows:-  It is submitted that the complainant deposited Rs.1,05,000/- (customer ID No.30103926294 dt.29.11.2013, project code NCPs) in Dreamland Ventures Private Limited and also deposited Rs.50,000/- (Ref. No.APR12/ 344951/1039, Customer ID No.30103921176 dt.9.4.2012, project code GVP) in Agri Gold Farm Estates India (P) Limited and also deposited Rs.1,00,000/- (Reference No.FEB14/ 461728/1039, Customer ID No.30103926826 dt.5.2.2014, project green sanders) in Agri Gold Farm Estates India (P) Ltd. Thus in total amount comes to Rs.2,55,000/-. The complainant lost confidence on the opposite parties which comes under Agri Gold Group of companies in view of doing their business against the Rules prescribed and more so their offices are not functioning at their respective business places properly to give necessary services to the complainant. Therefore, the complainant submitted his three bonds worth Rs.2,55,000/- to the 1^st opposite party to return back his amount with interest along with prescribed claim forms, but received the same and failed to pay back the said amount.  However, the 1^st opposite party said that they have no practice of issuing acknowledgements to any customers and as such, the complainant did not receive any acknowledgement.  The complainant gave notice to the opposite parties 1 and 2 through his counsel on 14.3.2015 for repayment of the above said Rs.2,55,000/- with up to date interest as per rules, but the 1^st opposite party did not receive the notice and the 2^nd opposite party presumed as received the notice since the cover was not returned and did not respond for such notice. Hence, the complaint.

3.         The 2^nd opposite party filed its written version and denied all the allegations made by the complainant. It is submitted that the correct name of the opposite party company is Agrigold Farm Estates India Private Limited, but not Agrigold Group of Companies, simplicitor. Hence, the complaint may be returned as filed against incorrect parties. It is submitted that the 1^st opposite party is the Branch Manager of Dreamland Ventures (P) Ltd., which is the sister concern company under the Flagship of Agrigold Group of Companies. As such, the 2^nd opposite party is filing this written version on behalf of itself and its subordinate office. As per the terms and conditions of the plot booking application, all the disputes civil, consumer or otherwise, as the case may be, are subject to jurisdiction of Vijayawada city, A.P. India only. Hence, the complaint may please be rejected to file before the appropriate forum as agreed upon by the parties. The complainant did not furnish the correct facts to this Hon’ble Forum. The main allegation of the complaint is “deficiency of service”. However, as the complaint contain certain wrong averments in respect of the business activities and transactions between the opposite party company and the complainant; this opposite party would like to bring the following further information to the kind notice of this Hon’ble Forum. This opposite party company i.e. Agrigold Farm Estates India Private Limited is an incorporated company under the companies Act, 1956 and is engaged in the business of real estate, which includes purchasing/developing/marketing/selling of flats, apartment complexes, estate lands and Farm lands/plots but not in the business of any schemes as alleged in the complaint. For the convenience of the customers, the company provides a facility for the payment of cost of plots in easy installments or otherwise. On completion of the payment of cost of plot, without any defaults or late payments, the plot will be registered in the name of customer after payment of required stamp duty etc., and submission of required documents by the customer as required under Registration Act, 1908 for the registration of sale deed. In this instant case, the complainant booked 3 farm land plots in NCPS, Green Villa Project, Green Sanders at a discounted prices i.e. three plots at costs of Rs.1,05,000/-, one plot Rs.50,000/- and one plot Rs.1,00,000/-. Worth to be payable at once. During the period from August, 2013 till May, 2014, due to continuous harthals, agitations, bundhs etc., in connection with the issue of bifurcation of State of Andhra Pradesh and from thereafter till December, 2014 due to the uncertainly in deciding the State capital, there were lots of cancellation of bookings or requests for change of venture from Telanga to Andhra region or to Rayalaseema region or vice – versa, which had dislocated the business activities of the company. As there was dislocation of work and business activities, though the company need not refund in full in respect of cancellation or defaults or may insist for getting the plot registered, yet considering various facts including the sentiments of the customers, used to accept the request of the customers for cancellation. On 4^th January, 2015, on a complaint of dishonor of cheque, the West Godavari police registered a case against the company u/s. 120B, 420 IPC, Section 5 of APPDFE Act, 1998, Section 45 of RBI Act and Sections 3,4 and 5 of Prize chit & Money circulation (Banning) Act, 1978. Immediately, all these facts were explained to the appropriate authorities in the State, where by the Government of AP immediately transferred the case to CID of AP and the investigation is going on. In continuation of the above, Income Tax Department also conducted search and seizure operations in the month of January, 2015 and seized most of the vital records. With regard to the allegations of Lack of required services and deficiency of service etc., it is respectfully submitted that there is no atom of cheating on the part of the company and or its directors or any of its associates as the Agrigold group is in existence since more than 19 years. Hence, there is no deficiency of service on the part of this opposite party and the complaint is liable to be dismissed with costs.  

4.         The proof affidavit filed by the complainant and Exs.A1 to A3 have been marked. The 2^nd opposite party filed proof affidavit and Exs.B1 to B4 have been marked.

5.         Heard the complainant and the 2^nd opposite party.

6.         Points raised for consideration are:

1. Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties?

            2. Whether the complainant is entitled for the reliefs asked for?

            3. To what relief?

7.  POINT Nos.1 & 2:  On perusal of the record, it is found that the complainant invested an amount of Rs.50,000/- vide (Ref. No.APR12/ 344951/1039, Customer ID No.30103921176 dt.9.4.2012, project code GVP) in Agri Gold Farm Estates India (P) Limited; Rs.1,05,000/- (customer ID No.30103926294 dt.29.11.2013, project code NCPs) in Dreamland Ventures Private Limited and Rs.1,00,000/- (Reference No.FEB14/461728/1039, Customer ID No.30103926826 dt.5.2.2014, project green sanders) in Agri Gold Farm Estates India (P) Ltd., through the 1^st opposite party branch office at Rajahmundry of the 2^nd opposite party and all the above said ventures were floated by the Agrigold Group of Companies i.e. the 2^nd opposite party herein.

            As the opposite parties are doing their business against the rules prescribed and most of their offices were not functioning at their respective business places to give necessary services to the complainant, the complainant submitted the above said deposited bonds worth of Rs.2,55,000/- to the 1^st opposite party for refund of the amount with interest along with prescribed claim forms, but the 1^st opposite party did not issue any acknowledgements for the same. When the opposite parties failed to refund the deposited amount with interest, the complainant got issued legal notice dt.14.3.2015 vide Ex.A1 & Ex.A2 demanding for refund of amount. The 1^st opposite party did not receive the notice and returned with postal authorities endorsement as ‘addressee left and whereabouts not known’ as per Ex.A3. and the 2^nd opposite party notice presumed to be received as the cover was not returned and did not respond for the same.

The 2^nd opposite party filed its version and stated that the correct name of the opposite party company is Agrigold Farm Estates India Private Limited and the 1^st opposite party is the branch office of Dreamland Ventures Private Limited is a sister concern under the flagship of Agrigold Group of Companies. Further, the 2^nd opposite party contended that the Forum at Rajahmundry has no jurisdiction to entertain this complaint as all disputes civil, consumer or otherwise or subject to Vijayawada jurisdiction only, but this condition is unilateral and so, not applicable. The 2^nd opposite party further contended that as per the agreed terms, the complainant after payment of total sale consideration has to remit the required stamp duty, registration fee, user charges etc. in addition of photographs, I.D. and address proof etc. within the stipulated date as per the first receipt issued to the customer. In the present case, the complainant booked three farmland plots in NCPS, Green Villa Project and Green Sanders at discounted price and paid an amount of Rs.2,55,000/- in total. But, they are not bonds as alleged by the complainant, they are the receipts issued by the opposite parties company acknowledging the payment of advance.  

The complainant has to proceed for required registration of the same plots after the execution date only and the complainant has no right to file a suit in any manner. The 2^nd opposite party further stated that during August, 2013 to May, 2014 in connection with the bifurcation of State of Andhra Pradesh and from thereafter till December, 2014, there were lots of cancellation of bookings or requests for change of venture from Telangana to Andhra vice versa dislocated the business activities of the opposite parties. The opposite parties further stated that the Andhra Pradesh CID made search seizure and provisional attachment of properties and bank accounts of the opposite parties as per Ex.B3 & Ex.B4 and the matter is pending before the Special Court at Eluru. The opposite parties further stated that the group is entering into MOU with private equity funders in the proposed joint ventures on 5^th January, 2015 and accordingly, in formed all the issues related to the refunds from 5^th January, 2015. Further, stated that a case was registered against the company under Section 120B, 420 IPC, Section 3 of A.P.P.D.F.E. Act, 1998 vide Ex.B2, Section 45 of RBI Act and Sections 3, 4 & 5 of Private Chit and Money Circulation (Banning) Act, 1978. The SEBI passed an exparte interim prohibitory order on 5.2.2015 vide Ex.B1 which forced stoppage of all activities related to the real estate business of the group.  

         We observed that as per the version of the 2^nd opposite party, the entire properties were seized by the government to protect all the depositors of the Agrigold Farm Estates India Private Limited which floated several real estate ventures in the States of Andhra Pradesh, Telangana and Karnataka. So, all the investments made by the complainant were locked with the opposite parties. The opposite parties neither registered the farm plots in the name of the complainant nor refunded the amounts deposited by the complainant in all the three ventures floated by the opposite parties in whatever name the ventures called.

With the discussion held supra and under the facts and circumstance of the case, we are in the considered opinion that the opposite parties are liable to refund the entire deposited amount of Rs.2,55,000/- in three ventures, vide Rs.50,000/- in GVP, Rs.1,05,000/- in NCPS and Rs.1,00,000/- in Green Sanders ventures with interest from the date of demand i.e. 14.3.2015 till realization. The complainant claimed interest at higher rate, but we are in the opinion that 12% interest per annum is sufficient to meet the ends of justice as non-refund of deposited amount, inspite of demand amounts to deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties.  

8.   POINT No.3:  In the result, the complaint is allowed, directing the opposite parties to refund the deposited amount of Rs.2,55,000/- with interest @ 12% p.a. from the date of demand i.e. 14.03.2015 till realization to the complainant. We further direct the opposite parties to pay Rs.2,000/- towards the costs of this complaint to the complainant.

 

Typed to dictation, corrected and pronounced by us in open Forum, on this the           

17^th day of December, 2015.

    

                 Sd/-xxx                                                                                         Sd/-xxx

              MEMBER                                                                              PRESIDENT(FAC)

         

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINE

 

FOR COMPLAINANT: None.                                                                                 FOR OPPOSITE PARTIES: None.

 

DOCUMENTS MARKED

FOR COMPLAINANT:

 

Ex.A1    Legal notice dt.14.3.2015 issued to the 1^st opposite party with registered postal receipt.

Ex.A2    Legal notice dt.14.3.2015 issued to the 2^nd opposite party with registered postal receipt.

Ex.A3    Returned cover dt.16.3.2015 issued to the 1^st opposite party.

 

FOR 2^nd OPPOSITE PARTY:-  

 

Ex.B1    Order passed by SEBI dt.19.2.2015.

Ex.B2    G.O.Ms.No.23 dt.20.2.2015.

Ex.B3    G.O.Rt.No.634 dt.2.6.2015.

Ex.B4    G.O.Ms.No.73 dt.5.6.2015.

                  Sd/-xxx                                                                                       Sd/-xxx

              MEMBER                                                                              PRESIDENT(FAC)