Date of Filing:15.11.2007<br /> Date of Order: 25.03.2008<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> BEFORE THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM SESHADRIPURAM BANGALORE-20<br /> <br /> Dated: 25TH DAY OF MARCH 2008<br /> PRESENT<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Sri. S.S. NAGARALE, B.A, LL.B. (SPL.), President.<br /> Smt. D. LEELAVATHI, M.A.LL.B, Member.<br /> Sri. BALAKRISHNA. V. MASALI, B.A, LL.B. (SPL.), Member.<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> COMPLAINT NO: 2274 OF 2007 <br /> <br /> <br /> Prof. C. Ponnuswamy,<br /> S/o Late T. Chamundi,<br /> R/at No.B-48, KPWD Quarters,<br /> Jeevan Bhima Nagar, <br /> Bangalore-560 075. Complainant<br /> <br /> V/S<br /> 1. The Managing Director, <br /> Damden Properties and Investments Pvt Ltd.,<br /> Office at No.15/2, Raja Ram Mohan Roy Road,<br /> Richmond Circle, Bangalore-560 025,<br /> Represented by Sri. I.M.S. Karla.<br /> <br /> 2. The Director,<br /> Damden Properties and Investments Pvt Ltd.,<br /> Office at No.15/2, Raja Ram Mohan Roy Road,<br /> Richmond Circle, Bangalore-560 025,<br /> Represented by its Director,<br /> Sri. Dennis T Basil.<br /> <br /> Present Address at:x<br /> Damden Era, Pent House,<br /> No.7/27, 4th Cross,<br /> Venkateshwara Layout,<br /> Tavarekere Main Road,<br /> Bangalore-560 029. Opposite Parties<br /> <br /> <br /> ORDER<br /> By the President Sri. S.S. Nagarale<br /> <br /> This is a complaint filed U/Sec.12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.<br /> The facts of the case are that, the complainant became a member of opposite party society. Copy of endorsement has been produced. Complainant entered into sale agreement on 28/8/1998 under the scheme known as “Damden Heritage-2 Opal view” at Huligondanahalli village, Dasanapura Hobli, Bangalore North. The total sale consideration amount of site measuring 30 X 40 feet was Rs.79,000/-. The complainant had paid totally 54 monthly installments for Rs. 850/- each and half yearly payments of Rs.2,400/- for 9 installments each. In all he has paid Rs. 67,500/- towards purchase of site. Complainant demanded refund of amount. Till today the opposite party has failed to refund the amount or to deliver the possession of site. Complainant is a physically challenged person due to blindness. Complainant got issued legal notice on 9/10/2007 under RPAD. Notice is produced. Therefore, the complainant has prayed for allotment of site or alternatively to refund the amount deposited by him along with interest and compensation of Rs.1,00,000/-.<br /> 2. Notice was issued to opposite parties. Notice served by RPAD. In spite of service of notice opposite party No.1 remained absent and placed exparte. Opposite party No.2 put in appearance and filed defence version. In the defence version the opposite party No.2 admitted that the complainant is a member of the opposite party society and the complainant is bound by the agreement. It is the duty of the opposite party that, for non-payment of monthly installment the agreement has stood cancelled and the amount paid by the complainant is forfeited. Complainant has failed to comply the terms of agreement. Hence, opposite party No.2 prayed to dismiss the complaint.<br /> 3. Affidavit evidence of complainant filed. The opposite party No.2 has not filed affidavit evidence in spite of granting sufficient opportunity. Arguments are heard. <br /> 4. The points for consideration are:- <br /> 1. Whether there was a deficiency in service on the <br /> part of the opposite parties?<br /> <br /> 2. Whether the complainant is entitled for refund of amount paid by him along with interest and compensation?<br /> <br /> <br /> REASONS<br /> 5. This is a simple case for refund of amount paid by the complainant towards purchase of site measuring 30 X 40 feet. The complainant has produced membership confirmation letter and also agreement of sale executed by the opposite parties. Complainant has produced legal notice issued to the opposite parties. He has also produced pass book issued by the opposite parties. The membership number of the complainant is 497. The complainant has paid in all Rs. 67,500/- towards purchase of site. But unfortunately the opposite parties could not allot the site and failed to execute the sale deed. The complainant has demanded refund of the amount in 2002 itself, but till today the opposite parties failed to refund the amount. Complainant got issued legal notice through Lawyer and demanded for refund of the amount. Even then also the opposite party has not refunded the amount. Opposite parties had admitted that complainant is member of the opposite parties and it is also admitted case that, opposite parties had executed an agreement of sale in favour of the complainant. The only defence taken by the opposite parties is that, as per the terms it has forfeited the amount paid by the complainant towards purchase of site cannot be forfeited in law. The opposite parties have failed to prove that, what are the terms and conditions that have been violated by the complainant. Mere stating that the amount paid by the complainant has been forfeited in the defence version does not establish the case of the opposite party. The opposite parties have taken its defence version only to be rejected. The said defence is devoid of merits. The opposite parties should have refunded the amount honourably without postponing the same on the demand of the complainant. The complainant being a physically challenged person due to his blindness has support lot in parting with his money with a hope that he may get site, but in this case the complainant could not get the site and his amount was enjoyed by the opposite parties for such a long time. Therefore, the complainant naturally entitled to get his money back along with interest and compensation. Since the site values have increased 100 fold and it is very difficult for a common man in Bangalore to get a site. Due to price variation the complainant should be suitably compensated for not getting the site. In the result, I proceed to pass the following:-<br /> ORDER<br /> <br /> 6. The complaint is allowed. The opposite parties are directed to refund Rs. 67,500/- to the complainant along with interest at 18% p.a from 8/5/2002 (date of last payment) till realization. The opposite parties are directed to pay compensation of Rs.50,000/- apart from the refund of amount and interest. The complainant is also entitled to Rs.5,000/- as costs of the present proceedings from the opposite parties. The opposite parties are directed to make the payment within 30 days from the date of this order, failing which the compensation amount also carries interest at 10% p.a from the date of this order till realization. The opposite parties are directed to make the payment to the complainant as ordered above directly by way of D.D or cheque with intimation to this Forum.<br /> 7. Send the copy of this Order to both the parties free of costs immediately. <br /> <br /> 8. Pronounced in the Open Forum on this 25TH DAY OF MARCH 2008.<br /> Order accordingly,<br /> <br /> <br /> PRESIDENT<br /> <br /> We concur the above findings.<br /> <br /> <br /> MEMBER MEMBER <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />