COMPLAINTS FILED ON:22.08.2011

DISPOSED ON:27.03.2012.

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM AT BANGALORE (URBAN)

27^th DAY OF MARCH-2012

  PRESENT:-  SRI. B.S. REDDY                   PRESIDENT       

                      SRI.A.MUNIYAPPA                     MEMBER              

COMPLAINT Nos.1548 & 1549/2011

COMMON  ORDER

SRI. B.S.REDDY, PRESIDENT

Both these complaints U/s. 12 of the Consumer Protection Act of 1986 by the respective complainants are against the same Opposite Party (herein after called as O.P) seeking direction to refund an amount of Rs.5,04,000/- with interest to each on the allegations of deficiency in service.

2. OP in spite of intimation delivered with regard to the notice sent by registered post, failed to appear without any justifiable cause, hence placed ex-parte.

3.In order to substantiate complaint averments, the complainants filed affidavit evidence and produced documents.  

4. Heard from complainant’s side.

5.We have gone through the complaint averments, the documents produced and affidavit evidence of the complainants. On the basis of these materials, it becomes clear that OP entered into an agreement of sale dt.16.02.2007 in complaint No.1549/11,  on 21.02.2007 in complaint No.1548/11 in respect of plot bearing No.415 and 618 respectively in the layout called as “My County” at Chikkahullur Village, Kasaba Hobli Hoskote Taluk, Bangalfore Rural District for a total consideration of Rs.15,12,000/- for each site measuring 30 X 40 feet and has received initial sale consideration of Rs.5,04,000/- and executed the agreement deeds. OP failed to fulfill its obligation by acquiring any land for the purpose of formation of the layout and to allot the sites as assured. The legal notice issued was returned un-served as no such firm is existing in the said address. Thus the act of Ops neither forming any layout and allotting the site nor refunding the amount received from these complainants, amounts to deficiency in service.

6.There is no reason to disbelieve the unchallenged affidavit evidence of the complainants, the documents produced. OP issued the receipts acknowledging the receipt of the amounts from each of these complainants. The very fact of Op remaining ex-parte leads to draw inference that Op is admitting the claim of these complainants. When OP was not able to form any layout by acquiring any land, it would have been fair enough on its part to refund the amount received towards initial sale consideration from these complainants. Under these circumstances, we are of the view that the complainants are entitled for refund of the amount paid with interest at 18% p.a. by way of compensation from the date of payment, till the date of realization and pay litigation cost of Rs.2,000/- each of these complainants. Accordingly, we proceed to pass the following:

O R D E R

        Both these complaints are allowed in part.

Op is directed to refund an amount of Rs.5,04,000/- with interest at 18% p.a. from the respective date of payment, till realization and pay litigation cost of Rs.2,000/- to each of these complainants.  

This order is to be complied within four weeks from the date of its communication.

This original order shall be kept in the file of the complaint No.1548/2011 and a copy of it shall be placed in other connected file.

 Send copy of this order to both the parties free of costs.

(Dictated to the Stenographer and typed in the computer and transcribed by her verified and corrected, and then pronounced in the Open Court by us on this the 27^th day of March-2012.)

MEMBER                                               PRESIDENT

Cs.