DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SAHIBZADA AJIT SINGH NAGAR (MOHALI)
Consumer Complaint No.434 of 2018
Date of institution: 10.04.2018 Date of decision : 14.07.2020
Usha Rani wife of Lt. Shri O.P. Wadhwa, resident of H.No.3287-A, Sector 24-D, Chandigarh.
…….Complainant
Versus
The Director of M/s. Sky Net Builders Pvt. Ltd., Block No.14-A, Level No.6, Skynet Towers Bhabat, Zirakpur, Punjab.
……..Opposite Party
Complaint under Section 12 of
the Consumer Protection Act.
Quorum: Mrs. Natasha Chopra, Presiding Member,
Shri Inderjit, Member.
Present: Shri S.K. Khurcha, counsel for the complainant.
OP Ex-parte.
Order by :- Mrs. Natasha Chopra, Presiding Member.
Order
The complainant purchased flat No.18-
B, 1st Floor, Skynet Enclave, Lohgarh M.C. Zirakpur, on payment of total price of the flat by complainant to the OP by 05.08.2006, physical possession was handed over to her alongwith necessary documents and water supply and electricity connection. The OP promised to register the aforesaid flat in the name of complainant in the office of competent authority lateron. The complainant approached OP many times with the request to register the flat in her name but the OP is avoiding on one pretext or the other. On asking of OP, the complainant signed and submitted the affidavit on 05.01.2018 which was got typed by OP but till date the flat has not been got registered in the name of the complainant. The complainant sent legal notice dated 30.01.2018, reply to which was sent by the OP vide letter dated 16.02.2018. The complainant again sent notice dated 23.02.2018 which was returned due to refusal. The complainant has sought directions to the OP to approach the concerned registration authority of the flat to complete the formalities for registration of the flat in the name of complainant. The complainant has also sought further direction to OP to refund the amount of Rs.10,000/- (security) alongwith interest @ 24% per annum which was taken by the OP on account of usage charges etc. and to pay Rs.20,000/- as legal expenses alongwith Rs.50,000/- for causing loss of precious time and mental harassment for providing deficient services.
2. OP is ex-parte in this case.
3. Ld. Counsel for the complainant tendered in evidence affidavit of complainant Ex.CW-1/1 alongwith documents Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-6 and Ex.C-3/A and thereafter closed evidence. After amendment of the complaint, ld. Counsel for complainant tendered affidavit Ex.CW-1/2 of the complainantand then closed evidence.
4. We have heard arguments of ld. Counsel for the complainant and have gone through the record of this case.
5. The possession of the allotted flat has been taken over by the complainant on 05.08.2006 as per Ex.C-2. The complainant has herself produced in evidence affidavit Ex.C-3 dated 05.01.2018 duly attested by the Notary, clause No.4 of which reads as under:
“That I was not able to register the above purchased flat due to lack of funds at that time. But now I am ready to register my purchased flat and I am bound to pay any extra charges/fines imposed by any Govt. Department due to late registration charges. If I sell my flat to anybody, then upto that time I will be liable to pay any dues/charges/fines etc. left on the flat.”
6. So from this clause, it is clear that till 05.01.2018, the complainant was not able to register the purchased flat due to lack of funds. Counsel for complainant contends that the affidavit was got typed by OP itself and then got it signed from complainant. This contention of counsel for complainant does not hold any water as, if any content of the affidavit was not as per factual position, the complainant should not have signed the affidavit but she has signed the same and also put her Aadhar card number on the same. In addition to it, the complainant has verified the facts of the affidavit to the best of her knowledge and belief. There is no cogent evidence on record which proves the assertions of the complainant that the affidavit was got typed by OP and then got it signed from the complainant. In this regard, the contention raised by counsel for the complainant has no force. So, the complainant is estopped from pleading this fact by her own act and conduct. Contents of letter dated 16.02.2018 Ex.C-5 shows that the OP has requested the complainant to contact the registration authority Derabasi and get the penalty amount, if any, calculated and deposit the same with the Govt. It was further mentioned in the letter Ex.C-5 that “No Objection Certificate” from Tehsil Derabassi shall be taken and submitted to the OP so that registration deed of the apartment could be executed. There is no evidence on the file which shows that the complainant has obtained “No Objection Certificate” from Tehsil Derabassi and submitted the same to the OP for registration of deed of the flat purchased by her from the OP. So no fault can be attributed to the OP regarding non registration of flat of complainant by OP from the concerned registration authority.
7. As regards refund of amount of Rs.10,000/- (security deposit for usage charges as in Ex.C-6), learned counsel for complainant has argued that OP has refunded security amount to other flat owners, so it should be refunded to her also. However, no document regarding refund of Rs.10,000/- as security by the OP to any other flat owners has been produced on the file by complainant. So this prayer of the complainant is also not maintainable.
8. As a sequel of above discussion, we find no merit in the complaint and hereby dismiss the same but without any order as to cost. The arguments on the complaint were heard and the order was reserved. Now the order be communicated to the parties. Copies of the order be supplied to the parties as per rules and thereafter the file be indexed and consigned to record room.
Announced
July 14, 2020
(Mrs. Natasha Chopra)
Presiding Member
(Inderjit)
Member
