Col. Ravinder Kumar Gogia Vs. The Chief Manager etc.

Present: Sh. Sandeep Kalia, Adv Counsel for the Complainant.

1. This complaint presented before us for consideration on the question of admission.

2. The brief facts of the complaint are that the complainant along with his wife Dr. Jyoti Gogia purchased property/house bearing No.139-140, Seth Hukam Chand Colony, Jalandhar measuring 15 Marlas 56 Sq. Ft., comprised in Khasra No.32527/459, 460/13, 32528/465, 466 to 471 in the name of Sahil Jain son of Rajneesh Jain as per document No.5793 dated 29.09.2010 duly registered with Sub Registrar, Jalandhar, which was owned by Sh. Rajneesh Jain son of Shri Nem Chand Jain, vide gift deed No.4091 dated 02.08.2010, duly registered with Sub-Registrar, Jalandhar through e-auction and advertisement published in two newspapers dated 29.02.2016 namely Indian Express and Jagbani, for a sum of Rs.1,86,50,000/- and the complainant along with his wife Dr. Jyoti Gogia were the highest bidder and the bid of the complainants was accepted by the OPs and the complainant has also deposited 10% of the total auction amount on 29.03.2016, vide EMD Account No.01900200002949, IFSC Code: IOBA000190 with bank for participation in e-auction and the complainants were enrolled as a register bidder for House No.139-140, Seth Hukam Chand Colony, Jalandhar.

3. That the OPs have also confirmed the 10% of the amount deposited by the complainant and his wife Dr. Jyoti Gogia for the purchase of above said property and the OPs have also further asked the complainant to deposit 1% of the Income Tax in respect of the sale consideration of the above said property amounting to Rs.1,86,500/-, which was not a terms and conditions of e-auction and the Income Tax is to be paid by the seller to the Income Tax Authorities as per rules, but the complainant has to deposit Rs.1,86,500/- under compulsion as his bid was accepted by the OPs.

4. That it is pertinent to mention here that the same amount is still lying with the OPs and the OPs have not deposited the said amount to Income Tax Authorities and the OPs have also deprived the complainant of interest on Rs.1,86,500/- which might accrued to the complainant in their FDR. The complainant has also deposited 15% of the remaining amount of bid to make it 25% as per terms and conditions of the e-auction vide cheque bearing No.187163 dated 30.03.2016, amounting to Rs.27,97,500/- and third installment of Rs.1,30,00,000/- was paid by the complainant after obtaining loan from Punjab National Bank and fourth and final payment was paid by the complainants, vide cheque No.187164 dated 04.04.2016 for a sum of Rs.9,87,500/-, thus, the complainant has paid the entire sale consideration of the said house purchased in auction through e-auction, to the OPs within stipulated time.

5. That the Sale Certificate under Rule 9(6) was issued in favour of the complainants dated 06.04.2016, but there was some variation in respect of pertaining to land measuring 2.25 Marlas, which was informed by Halqa Patwari and accordingly, a fresh Sale Certificate was requested to be issued in the name of Mrs. Jyoti Gogia W/o of Col. Ravinder Kumar Gogia against whom the sale deed is to be executed after correcting the same and the sale certificate issued in favour of the complainant was already returned to the OPs in original. The complainants have already purchased the property by availing loan, as mentioned above and due to non execution of the sale deed in favour of the complainants, the complainant suffer irreparable loss and injury, which cannot be compensated and measured in terms of money. The OPs have either to execute sale deed in favour of the complainant as per e-auction and the amount deposited by the complainant for purchase of said house measuring 24 Marlas 72 Sq. Ft. or to execute sale deed in respect of property measuring 22 Marlas and proportionately returned the amount of 2 Marlas 25 Sq. Ft.. The act and conduct of the OPs have caused lot of tension to the complainant, which caused mental tension and agony to the complainant and accordingly, a legal notice was issued to the OP, but all in vain and thus, necessity arose to file the complaint with the prayer that the complaint of the complainant may be accepted and OP be directed to return the amount of Rs.1,86,500/- as received from the complainant in the shape of 1% Income Tax from the date of acceptance, till realization and further OPs be directed to pay interest on the amount of Rs.1,86,500/- alongwith future interest and OPs be also directed to pay compensation of Rs.10,00,000/- for causing harassment, mental agony and tension on account of late execution of sale deed in favour of the complainant and further OPs be directed to pay litigation expenses of Rs.11,000/-.

6. We have heard the learned counsel for the complainant and also scanned the case file very minutely with the able assistance of counsel for the complainant.

7. After hearing the argument and from perusal of the file, it reveals that the complainant has sought a relief of refund of Rs.1,86,500/- as got deposited by the OP 1% Income Tax on the total sale consideration of Rs.1,86,50,000/-. Admittedly, the said disputed amount of Rs.1,86,500/- as 1% Income Tax have been already deposited by the complainant without any protest. If the complainant had already voluntarily deposited the said amount of 1% Income Tax, then how he can re-agitate the said act, which he has done voluntarily. The said amount of 1% Income Tax has not been got deposited by the OP forcibly rather the OP served a notice dated 03.03.2016 to the complainant and whereby gave information to the complainant that OP has accepted his offer of amount of Rs.1,86,50,000/- towards sale of property and further informed the complainant that he has to deposit in addition to the sale consideration, 1% of the sale consideration towards Income Tax. Complying of the aforesaid letter dated 30.03.2016 sent by the OP to the complainant, the complainant deposited the said amount within the stipulated period without any protest and hesitation and accordingly, thereafter the OP informed the complainant, vide letter dated 16.04.2016 that the OP has received 1% Income Tax towards the sale consideration through cheque number 187331, amounting to Rs.1,86,500/- from the complainant and thereafter, the complainant sent a letter dated 10.08.2016, to the OP for issuing of sale deed and also informed the OP that the complainant has already deposited 1% Income Tax i.e. Rs.1,86,500/- on the total sale consideration. So, it is clear from the aforesaid letter that the complainant has voluntarily deposited the amount by knowing prior to deposit and if the complainant feels any illegality in depositing the said 1% Income Tax on the sale consideration, then the complainant has very much liberty at that time to stop the payment and filed a complaint in the Consumer Forum, but he did not to do so for the best known reason, rather later on by manipulating and distorting the story filed the instant complaint, which seems to be false and frivolous, whenever such like complaint is filed that should be dismissed with compensatory cost, but we find that the instant complaint is the first misconduct of the complainant and therefore, he is immune from the imposition of cost and accordingly, this compliant is dismissed being without merits. Copy of the order be sent to the complainant free of costs under the rules. File be consigned to the Record Room.

Dated Harvimal Dogra Karnail Singh

24.04.2018 Member President