Haryana

Sonipat

10/2014

RAJ KUMAR S/O RAMDEV - Complainant(s)

Versus

THE MANAGING DIRECTOR M/S OMAXE LTD. - Opp.Party(s)

B.S. MALIK

07 Jan 2015

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,

SONEPAT.

               

                                Complaint No.10 of 2014

                                Instituted on:08.01.2014

                                Date of order:06.04.2015

 

Raj Kumar son of Shri Ram Dev, resident of H.No.477, Sector 15, Sonepat.

                                            ...Complainant.

                           Versus

The Managing Director, M/s Omaxe Limited, Registered Office 7, Local Shopping Centre, Kalkaji,  New Delhi-110019.

                                                ...Respondent.

COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 12 OF

THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,1986

 

Argued by: Sh. B.S. Malik Adv. for complainant.

           Sh. Hari Om Sharma Adv. for respondent.

BEFORE-    NAGENDER SINGH………………………………………………PRESIDENT.

          SMT.PRABHA WATI……………………………………………MEMBER.

          D.V.RATHI……………………………………………………………MEMBER.

O R D E R

          The complainant has filed the present complaint against the respondent alleging therein that the complainant is transferee of villa no.935 Block E, Omaxe City, Delhi Extn. Sonepat which was originally allotted to one Neeraj Kumar.  The said villa was transferred in favour of the complainant in the year 2006.  The complainant has been making the payment of installments as per schedule given by the respondent.  The respondent was liable to complete the development/construction work in all respect of the said villa within a period of 18 months and it was also agreed that in case the respondent failed to hand over the possession of the said villa within stipulated period, then the complainant shall be entitled to have a compensation at the rate of Rs.5/- per sq. feet of super area per month for the delay in handing over the possession of the said villa. As per final letter of the respondent dated 4.8.2009, in which the total cost of the said villa was shown as Rs.2690072/-, in which the actual cost was Rs.23,32,072/- and Rs.20,000/- as IFMS plus Rs.40,000/- for club membership and Rs.2,98,000/- for EDC which comes to Rs.26,90,072/-.  Now the respondent through letter dated 29.5.2013 demanded the costs of the said villa as per respondent’s statement of account Rs.28,69,444.42 paise. The complainant vide letter dated 8.5.2013 and 19.06.2013 sought the clarification from the respondent and requested to release the amount of penalty for the delay in possession, but of no use.    The respondent’s demand of excess amount of Rs.1,83,834.42 paise is illegal, arbitrary and without any basis.  Nothing is due against the complainant except the last payment of installment as per respondent’s statement of account issued to the complainant and the complainant is ready to deposit the same with the respondent. However, the respondent had issued a letter dated 29.5.2013 in which the possession of the said villa was offered.  Infact, the villa was not completed at the time of issuance of letter of offer of possession even the said villa is still in incomplete condition.  The complainant served the respondent with legal notice dated 19.7.2013 requesting the respondent to make the payment of penalty/compensation alongwith interest at the rate of 24% per annum from the due date till realization for delay in delivery of possession of the said villa. The respondent has given the penalty to the others such as villa no.1165 of Rs.1,40,390/- and also requested to hand over the vacant physical possession of the said villa after accepting the last installment, but of no use and that amounts to a grave deficiency in service on the part of the respondent. So, the complainant has come to this Forum and has filed the present complaint.

2.       In reply, the respondent has submitted that the complainant did not abide the terms and conditions of the booking of plot and did not pay the amount as demanded by the respondent.  It is submitted that allotment letter of villa no.935 was sent to the customer in July, 2006 and this villa was transferred from Neeraj Kumar to complainant Raj Kumar in July, 2007.  The basic sale price was to the tune of Rs.28,69,544/-, besides this the complainant wass liable to pay interest free maintenance security and other dues and charges of the Govt. including EDC and IDC etc. The final area of the villa is 199.46 Sq. yards and built up area comes to 1224 Sq. feet.  The possession letter was issued to the complainant on 29.5.2013 with statement of account and at the time of possession, the complainant was liable to pay Rs.3,46,086.42 including interest amount of Rs.4262/-.  Till date, the total amount paid by the complainant is to the tune of Rs.25,27,820/- and he is liable to pay due amount of Rs.346086/- as per statement of account dated 29.5.2013.   It is submitted that as per the agreement, the buyer is liable to pay the amount mentioned in clause 4 of the agreement. As per clause 6 of the agreement, it was agreed that the buyer is liable to pay all government charges.  As per clause 7 of the agreement, the buyer was agreed to pay the amount of EDC, government rates, taxes and cess etc.   As per directions of Directorate, Town and Country planning, if demanded the payment of additional ECD, consequently such enhanced EDC has resulted impact of enhancement of price and the buyer undertakes to pay additionally to the company on demand any EDC and IDC levied.  The complainant has failed to pay the amount demanded by the respondents.  The complainant is liable to pay the enhanced EDC and IDC charges.  There is no deficiency in service on the part of the respondent and thus, prayed for the dismissal of the present complaint.

3.       We have heard the ld. Counsel for both the parties at length and we have also gone through the entire relevant material available on the case file carefully & minutely.

4.       As per document Annexure C5, the basic sale price of the Villa was Rs.23,32072/-. The complainant has placed on record the documents A1 to A8.  Document A2 was issued on 4.9.2006 and as per this letter, the total cost of the villa was Rs.25,52072/-.  As per Annexure A2 to A7, the basic price of the Villa no.9325 was Rs.25,52072/-.  But surprisingly as per document A8, the price of Villa was enhanced Rs.26,90,072/-.  As per Annexure A7 at Serial no.10, the complainant should pay 5% amount including IFMS, club membership and other charges at the time of offer of possession and this amount comes to Rs.1,16,603/-.  The complainant paid the installments in time or as and when demanded by the respondent office.  As per Annexure A8, the total amount of Rs.1,76,603/- is outstanding against the complainant including 100% IFMS + 100% additional charges.  The additional charges includes the club membership, EDC and IFMS. 

         The respondent has placed on record certain documents in his evidence.  As per document R1, the respondent informed the complainant regarding possession of the Villa and also informed the complainant regarding the completion of Villa.  The respondent has informed the complainant that “The Final finishing touches to your Villa will be taken up shortly.  On completion of codal formalities the possession of the said Villa will be given to you as per the terms of Buyer’s agreement.  But as per this document, the respondent failed to complete the Villa within the stipulated time and has also failed to hand over the possession of the Villa to the complainant in time.  Whereas the complainant has already paid the installments to the respondent in time or as and when demanded.  The respondent also issued the statement of account dated 29.5.2013 to the complainant and demanded a sum of Rs.3,46,086.42 paise from the complainant regarding the balance payment.  But this demand of the respondent is wrong and illegal and the respondent is only entitled to get Rs.1,76,603/- from the complainant as per annexure A8. 

         The complainant by way of present complaint has claimed the relief to direct the respondent to pay compensation at the rate of Rs.5/- per sq. feet super area per month for the period of delay in handing over the possession of the said villa to the complainant.

         The complainant in the present case has alleged himself the transferee of the Villa no.935 and the said villa was transferred in favour of the complainant in the year 2006.  If from the year 2006, the period of two years for the offer of possession of the villa is considered, it starts w.e.f. 1.1.2006 and ends on 31.12.2007.

         We have perused the condition no.26(a) and (f) of the agreement very carefully and as per these conditions, the respondent is liable to pay a sum at the rate of Rs.5/- per sq. feet of super area per month for the period of delay to the buyers.  Since the respondent has failed to comply with their own conditions, it is directed to the respondent to pay a sum at the rate of Rs.5/- per sq. feet of super area per month for the period of delay to the buyers w.e.f. 1.1.2008 till the offer of possession of the Villa.  The respondent is also directed to compensate the complainant to the tune of Rs.25000/- (Rs.twenty five thousands) for rendering deficient services, for causing unnecessary mental agony, harassment and under the head of litigation expenses.

           With these observations, findings and directions, the present complaint stands allowed.

          Certified copy of this order be provided to both the parties free of cost.

File be consigned to the record-room.

 

 

(Prabha Wati)        (DV Rathi)                 (Nagender Singh-President)

Member DCDRF        Member DCDRF                   DCDRF, Sonepat.

 

Announced: 06.04.2015