Karnataka

Bangalore Urban

CC/10/1306

Sri. K. Gopalakrishna. - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Secretary. - Opp.Party(s)

Vidhya Jahagirdar.

10 Jun 2010

ORDER


BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSLAL FORUM, BANGALORE, KARNATAKA STATE.
Bangalore Urban District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Cauvery Bhavan, 8th Floor, BWSSB Bldg., K. G. Rd., Bangalore-09.
consumer case(CC) No. CC/10/1306

Sri. K. Gopalakrishna.
...........Appellant(s)

Vs.

The Secretary.
...........Respondent(s)


BEFORE:


Complainant(s)/Appellant(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):




Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.

ORDER

COMPLAINT FILED: 11.06.2010 DISPOSED ON: 16.08.2010 BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM AT BANGALORE (URBAN) 16th AUGUST 2010 PRESENT :- SRI. B.S. REDDY PRESIDENT SMT. M. YASHODHAMMA MEMBER SRI. A. MUNIYAPPA MEMBER COMPLAINT NO.1306/2010 COMPLAINANT Sri. K. Gopalakrishna R/at No.12, 8th Cross 1st ‘A’ Main Road, 3rd Block, 3rd phase B.S.K. 3rd Stage Bangalore-560 085 Advocte Vidya Jahagirdar V/s. OPPOSITE PARTIES Sri. V. Srinivas The Secretary, Vyalikaval House Building Co-operative Society Ltd., No.62, 7th Main, Between 8th and 9th Cross, Malleshwaram, Bangalore-560 003. Ex-parte 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 Party (herein after called as O.P) to refund Rs.84,000/- with interest at 18% p.a from 19.05.1980 till the date of realization and compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- on the allegations of deficiency in service on the part of OP. 2. The brief averments made in the complaint are as follows: Complainant became the member of the OP who is engaged in forming of residential sites and layouts in and around Bangalore city with an intention to purchase a site OP accepted the membership of the complainant under the membership No.91.Complainant deposited Rs.5,000/- on 19.05.1980, Rs.14,000/- on 03.09.1983, Rs.5,000/- on 14.05.1987, Rs.10,000/- on 27.10.1999 and Rs.50,000/- on 19.11.1999. In all complainant paid Rs.84,000/- to OP on different dates. The receipts issued OP are produced. On 11.05.1987 OP issued provisional allotment letter to the complainant allotting a site measuring 1200 Sq. fts. at Hosahalli layout, Bangalore. OP assured to pay interest at 9% p.a. on fixed deposed till the date of registration but failed to pay any amount to the complainant. OP demanded Rs.50,000/- because of increase in the site value complainant paid Rs.50,000/- on 19.11.1999. OP went on postponing the registration of the site on 03.08.2009. Complainant wrote a letter to OP asking for refund of the amount. On 11.08.2009 OP gave the reply stating amount paid to land and to Government for land acquisition charges and cost. After receiving the amount from Government OP will refund the amount. But there is no exact date or time to refund the amount. Hence on 24.03.2010 complainant caused the legal notice demanding refund of Rs.84,000/- with interest at 12% p.a. On 29.03.2010 OP gave the reply stating OP has applied for loan and it will refund the amount. No date is mentioned for repayment. Hence complainant felt deficiency in service. Under the circumstances he is advised to file this complaint for the necessary relief’s. 3. After registration of the complaint notice is sent to OP inspite of service of notice OP remained absent without any sufficient reason or cause. Hence OP is placed ex-parte. 4. To substantiate the complaint averments complainant filed his affidavit evidence and produced two fixed deposit receipts for Rs.19,000/- and provisional allotment letter, cash deposit acknowledgements, Pass book extract, correspondence dated 03.08.2009, 03.08.2009, copies of the legal notice dated 24.03.2010 reply letter dated 29.03.2010. Heard the arguments of the complainant. 5. It is the case of the complainant that he lured way with the offer made by the OP became the member of the OP who are engaged in forming of residential sites and layout in and around Bangalore city with an intention to own a site. Under membership No.91 OP accepted the membership of the complainant. Complainant made payment of Rs.5,000/- on 19.05.1980 and Rs.14,000/- on 03.09.1983 by way of fixed deposits Rs.5,000/- on 14.05.1987 Rs.10,000/- on 27.10.1999 and Rs.50,000/- on 19.11.1999. In all complainant paid Rs.84,000/- to OP from 19.05.1980 to 19.11.1999. The receipts issued by OP are produced. From the correspondences and the documents produced by the complainant it appears that OP has lost 847 acres of land in the legal battle. Amount paid to government is not refunded OP has applied for loan to clear the dues of its members. It appears even after lapse of ten years OP is neither in a position to allot and register the site nor in a position to refund the amount. 6. 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 discard the sworn testimony of the complainant. Though OP collected huge amount for allotment and registration of the site but failed to form the layout. Even after eleven years of receipt of payment OP failed to refund the amount to the complainant till today. This act of the OP amounts to deficiency in service on its part. Complainant though invested his hard earned money, he is unable to reap the fruits of his investment. From the absence of the OP, inference can be drawn that OP admits all the allegation made by the complainant in toto. We are satisfied that complainant is able to prove deficiency in service on the part of the OP. Under the circumstances we are of considered view that complainant is entitled for refund of amount paid to OP with 12% interest and litigation cost of Rs.1,000/-. Accordingly we proceed to pass the following: ORDER The complaint is allowed in part. OP is directed to refund Rs.84,000/- with interest at 12% p.a. from December 1999 till realization and litigation cost of Rs.1,000/- 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 16th day of August 2010.) PRESIDENT MEMBER MEMBER gm.