Haryana

Sonipat

128/2014

1. SOM PARKASH GUPTA,2. VED GUPTA S/O OM PARKASH GUPTA - Complainant(s)

Versus

THE MANAGING DIRECTOR OMEXE LTD. - Opp.Party(s)

RAKESH SINGH SAROHA

07 Oct 2015

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,

SONEPAT.

               

                                Complaint No.128 of 2014

                                Instituted on:13.05.2014

                                Date of order:26.10.2015

 

1.Som Parkash Gupta 2. Ved Gupta sons of Sh. Om Parkash Gupta, residents of L-439, Model Town, Panipat.

                                            ...Complainants.

                           Versus

The Managing Director, Omaxe Ltd. registered office 7 Local Shopping Centre, Kalkaji New Delhi.                                                                                 ...Respondent.

COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 12 OF

THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,1986

 

Argued by: Sh. RS Saroha Adv. for complainants.

           Sh. HO Sharma, Adv. for respondent.

 

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

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

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

O R D E R

            The complainants have filed the present complaint against the respondents alleging therein that vide agreement dated 23.5.2007 the complainants booked a plot no.651 block B measuring 796.53 sq. yards in Omaxe City, Sonepat  with the respondent. All the installments were paid by the complainants to the respondents and the respondents vide letter dated 22.12.2012 assured that they will deliver the possession and registered the sale deed in favour of the complainants after receiving entire amount of plots.   But till date, the respondents have neither handed over the possession of the plot to the complainants nor registered the sale deed in favour of the complainants. Further the respondents have wrongly extorted the amount of Rs.3,10,000/- from the complainants and that amounts to a grave deficiency in service on the part of the respondents. So, they have come to this Forum and have filed the present complaint.

2.        In reply, the respondents have submitted that the complainants have paid Rs.16 lacs vide receipt dated 29.1.2007 and thereafter they paid Rs.10,48,463/- vide receipt dated 3.9.2007 and thereafter they did not pay any amount to the respondents despite repeated requests.  The total amount due towards the complainants was to the tune of Rs.11,11,448/- including interest.  On 28.2.2013, the complainants paid an amount of Rs.2 lacs towards interest payment and Rs.3,16,752/- towards electrical equipments, charges club cost and part payment and Rs.316750-/- towards enhanced ECD, water treatment plant cost, club costs, maintenance security. They also paid Rs.197150/- towards interest vide receipt dated 28.2.2013 and again Rs.197150/- vide receipt dated 1.4.2013.   However, at present, Rs.10,96,140/- are due against the complainants.   The respondents have denied the fact that they have extorted the amount of Rs.3,10,000/- from the complainants.  It was clearly told to the complainants to pay the balance sale consideration and physical possession of the plot will be handed over to them as per terms and conditions of the allotment letter.  But the complainants have failed to pay the amount demanded by the respondents and thus, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the respondents and prayed for the dismissal of the present complaint.

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

4.        The bare perusal of the document Annexure C2 placed on record by the complainants shows that the basic cost of the plot is Rs.27,87,855/-.  It is admitted fact by the respondents that the whole payment has been received by the respondents from the complainants in respect of the plot in question.  It is also proved from the material available on the case file that the physical possession of the plot has not been delivered by the respondents to the complainant.  

 

          The plea of the complainants is that the respondents have wrongly charged Rs.3,10,000/- from them.  But the perusal of the document C12 shows that the amount of Rs.310645/- were charged by the respondents on account of External Development Charges.  It has not been mentioned anywhere in Ex.C12 that  the interest has been charged by the respondents on the EDC amount of Rs.3,16,645/-.  So, it is held that the complainants are only entitled to get the interest on the basic cost of the plot from the respondents. Thus, we hereby direct the respondents to pay interest at the rate of 09% per annum on the amount of Rs.27,87,855/- w.e.f. 28.12.2013 till the delivery of the physical possession of the plot in favour of the complainants.  The respondents are further directed to deliver the possession of the plot in question to the complainant.  The respondents are further directed to compensate the complainants to the tune of Rs.3000/-  (Rs.three thousands) for deficiency in service, for harassment and further to pay Rs.2000/- (Rs.two thousands) under the head of litigation expenses.

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

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

File be consigned to the record-room.

 

 

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

Member DCDRF        Member DCDRF                   DCDRF, Sonepat.

 

Announced: