COMPLAINT FILED: 12.11.2010
DISPOSED ON: 14.03.2011
BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM AT BANGALORE (URBAN)
14th MARCH 2011
PRESENT :- SRI. B.S. REDDY PRESIDENT
SMT. M. YASHODHAMMA MEMBER
SRI. A. MUNIYAPPA MEMBER
COMPLAINT NO.2572/2010
Complainant | Deepa K.G. W/o. Girish Nandibasappa No.115, Sumadhura Serene Apts., Manipal Country Road Singasandra, Bngalore-560 068. Advocate: C. Krishnegowda V/s. |
OPPOSITE PARTIES | 1. The President, Karnataka Legislative Council Secretariat Employees Welfare Forum, Vidhana Soudha, Bangalore-560 001. Rept. by Mr. Maharajan 2. Sri. K.V.Venkatesh, S/o. Venkataramaiah, M/s. Sri.Venkateshwara Estate & Buildings, Office at No.2, 2nd Floor, Nehrunagar, Sheshadripuram, Bangalore-560 020. Advocate: Babu Pattar |
| | | |
O R D E R
SMT. M. YASHODHAMMA, MEMBER
This is a complaint filed U/s. 12 of the Consumer Protection Act of 1986 by the complainant seeking direction against the Opposite Parties (herein after called as O.P) to refund advance amount of Rs.10,98,000/- along with interest and expenses on the allegations of deficiency in service.
2. The brief averments made in the complaint are as follows:
OP-1 is the welfare society registered under Society Registration Act and OP-2 being the developer Jointly offered to form a layout namely “Vayuja Council Garden” at Hoovinayakanahalli Village, Jala Hobli, Bangalore North Taluk and OP-2 agreed to form a layout on behalf of OP-1 in phased manner and agreed to sell the sites to the member of OP-1 at provisional rate of Rs.610/- Per Sq. ft. and also agreed to develop the above said layout with all civic amenities as per BIAPPA regulations and promised to allot the site within December 2008 to its members. Complainant attracted by the said offer entered into agreement dated 11.04.2008 with OP 1 & 2 to purchase a residential site measuring 40 X 60 feet for a total consideration of Rs.14,64,000/- and paid Rs.10,98,000/- in 3 installments by way of cheques from 25.03.2008 to 02.08.2008. OP 1 & 2 acknowledged receipt of the advance amount and executed an agreement dated 11.04.2008. Both the parties agreed to the terms and conditions of the agreement. Complainant approached OPs in January 2009. The OPs promised that the project will take another four months to be completed. Again complainant approached OPs in the month of April 2009. OPs promised that project will be completed by December 2009. Again OPs postponed by another 3 months. At last OPs expressed their inability and agreed to refund the amount. Hence complainant requested OPs for refund of amount. OP-1 issued a cheque dated 05.10.2010 towards refund of amount on 15.10.2010 for a sum of Rs.10,98,000/- on presentation; the said cheque returned dishonoured. Complainant sent a letter dated 27.10.2010 to OPs informing the fact of dishonour. There was no response. Hence complainant felt deficiency in service on the part of the OPs. Under these circumstances she is advised to file this complaint for the necessary reliefs.
3. On registration of the complainant notice is sent to OP1&2. Though OPs entered their appearance through their advocate but failed to file the version inspite of giving sufficient time. Hence taken has version not filed.
4. In order to substantiate the complaint averments, complainant filed her affidavit evidence and produced copy of the three receipts issued by OPs, copy of the agreement dated 11.04.2008, letter of OP dated 29.05.2010. Copy of the cheque issued by OP with bank endorsement, postal acknowledgement and receipts. OPs did not participate in the proceedings. Heard the arguments of the complainant.
5. It is contended for the complainant that the complainant being lured away with the offer made by OP-2 who claims to be developer doing the business of forming layout and distributing sites to its members at different places in and around Bangalore and complainant being a member of OP-1 society entered into an agreement with OPs to purchase a residential site, dimension of 40 X 60 fts. totally measuring 2400 Sq.ft. for a total consideration of Rs.14,64,000/- formed in the layout known as “Vayuja Council Garden” situated at Hoovinayakanahalli, Jalahalli, Bangalore Rural District. Complainant paid Rs.10,98,,000/- advance to OP through cheques on different dates from the 25.03.2008 to 02.10.2008. OPs after receipt of the advance amount executed an agreement dated 11.04.2008. OP-1 & 2 have signed this agreement acknowledging the receipt of advance amount of Rs.10,98,000/-.
6. OPs went on postponing the completion of the project. Finally OP agreed to refund the advance amount. Though OP issued the cheque dated 15.10.2010 for a sum of Rs.10,98,000/- to the complainant towards refund of amount same, was dishonored on its presentation for encashment for the reason of insufficient funds. We have perused the copy of the cheque and bank endorsement produced by the complainant. On 27.10.2010 complainant sent a letter to OP informing the fact of dishonour of cheque. There was no response from OPs. Complainant has produced postal acknowledgement dated 29.10.2010.
9. We have perused the complaint averments and unchallenged affidavit evidence of the complainant. The documents produced by the complainant corroborates the case of the complainant. There is nothing to discord the sworn testimony of the complainant. If OPs were aware of the fact that they cannot allot and register the site as per their promise they could have fairly refunded the amount to the complainant. Retention of amount by OPs amounts to wrongful gain so as to cause wrongful loss to the complainant. The cheque issued was dishonoured, OPs failed to give any response to the letter of the complainant. This act of OPs amounts to deficiency in service on their part. Though OPs entered appearance through thier counsel failed to contest the matter inspite of giving sufficient opportunity. We can draw the interefence that OPs admits all the allegations made by the complainant in toto. We are satisfied that complainant is able to prove the deficiency in service on the part of the OPs. Under the circumstances we are of the considered view that complainant is entitled for the relief of refund of amount along with interest at 12% p.a. from the date of respective payments till realization and litigation cost of Rs.2000/-. Accordingly we proceed to pass the following:
O R D E R
The complaint is allowed in part. OPs are directed to refund Rs.10,98,000/- being advance amount received with 12% interest p.a from the date of respective payments till realization and also to pay litigation cost of Rs.2,000/- to the complainant.
This order is to be complied within four weeks from the date of its communication.
(Dictated to the Stenographer and typed in the computer and transcribed by him verified and corrected, and then pronounced in the Open Court by us on this the 14th day of March 2011.)
PRESIDENT
MEMBER MEMBER
*
