DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SAHIBZADA AJIT SINGH NAGAR (MOHALI)
Consumer Complaint No.237 of 2018
Date of institution: 21.02.2018 Date of decision : 02.08.2018
Madhu Sharma wife of V.P. Sharma resident of # 3357, Sector 46-C, Chandigarh, through authority holder Shri V.P. Sharma son of Shri N.L. Sharma.
…….Complainant
Versus
The Sky rock City Welfare Society, Mohali, Site Office, Sector 111-112, Mohali through its President Navjeet Singh.
……..Opposite Party.
Complaint under Section 12 of
the Consumer Protection Act.
Quorum: Shri G.K. Dhir, President,
Shri Amrinder Singh Sidhu, Member
Present: Shri Raghubir Singh, counsel for complainant.
OP ex-parte.
Order by :- Shri G.K. Dhir, President.
Order
OP invited applications for becoming members of its society and thereafter complainant became member by depositing Rs.5,000/- through receipt, so as to get a plot in revenue estate of Sector 111-112, Mohali in the project to be developed by OP. Residential house was to be got by complainant for own use and for use of growing family. OP supplied terms and conditions containing clause that if complainant do not want to continue even after paying installments, then she will be refunded the entire paid amount with interest @ 8% per annum after three years from the date of requisition. Total cost of the plot was Rs.11,25,000/-, but complainant deposited Rs.12,05,000/- on different dates. OP did not obtain the requisite approvals/permissions for raising residential colony, but despite that it accepted the hefty amount from complainant. Plot No.D-8 in Sector 111-112 measuring 250 sq. yards was provisionally allotted to complainant through letter dated 10.04.2014. Rate of the plot was Rs.4,500/- per sq. yard. Later on OP unilaterally changed the terms and conditions of possession by claiming that possession will be handed over within 36 months from the date of allotment namely 10.04.2014, but despite that OP failed to hand over the possession untill 10.04.2017 even. No progress of work was there on the spot and as such it is claimed that OP indulged in illegal activity of receiving consideration without getting permissions and approvals from the concerned authorities. Complainant got knowledge as if the promoter license granted to OP was cancelled by authorities. Rs.12,05,000/- including EDC and IDC charges collected from complainant by OP in illegal manner. Through public notice published in Tribune dated 28.02.2017 complainant got knowledge as if OP has booked more number of members than the available flats, as per approval granted by GMADA. Rather through that notice, general public was required not to purchase plot/flat/commercial shops in the project in question floated by OP because of unfair trade practice adopted by OP. So prayer made for seeking refund of Rs.12,05,000/- with interest @ 12% per annum from the dates of deposit till realisation. Compensation for mental harassment and agony of Rs.2.00 lakhs and litigation expenses of Rs.75,000/- more claimed.
2. OP is ex-parte in this case.
3. Complainant to prove her case tendered in evidence her representative’s affidavit Ex.CW-1/1 alongwith documents Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-16 and thereafter closed evidence.
4. Written arguments not submitted, but oral arguments heard and records gone through.
5. Contents of affidavit Ex.CW-1/1 of complainant alongwith receipts Ex.C-1, C-3, C-5 to C-11, entry of ledger account of OP Ex.C-12 establishes as if amount of Rs.12,05,000/- in fact has been deposited by complainant after becoming member of OP society after submitting application form Ex.C-14. Certificate Ex.C-13 of membership even issued in the name of complainant by OP society. Though total cost of plot is Rs.11,25,000/-, but complainant deposited Rs.12,05,000/- through above referred receipts and the produced documents and as such virtually complainant had deposited more than 100% of the cost amount plus IDC and EDC charges.
6. Complainant after going through notice Ex.C-15 got knowledge as if OP society did not possess the requisite license and it has cheated the general public, due to which general public was required not to purchase plot/flat from OP society. No progress of construction work carried on the spot and as such certainly OP adopted unfair trade practice by accepting more than the total price of the plot from complainant, but not providing her the plot. Rather OP not in a position to allot the plot in view of non obtaining of license or in view of cancellation of license by GMADA, earlier granted in favour of OP. So in view of this unfair trade practice adopted by OP, complainant entitled for refund of the entire paid amount with interest @ 12% per annum from the dates of deposits till payment. As none has come to contest and as such reasonable amount of compensation for mental agony and harassment and litigation expenses need be allowed in favour of complainant and against OP.
7. As a sequel of above discussion, complaint allowed against OP with direction to refund the received amount of Rs.12,05,000/- (Rs. Twelve Lakhs Five Thousand only) with interest @ 12% (Twelve) per annum from the dates of deposits till payment. Compensation for mental agony and harassment of Rs.20,000/- and litigation expenses of Rs. 5,000/- more allowed in favour of the complainant and against the OP. Payment of these amounts of compensation and litigation cost be made within 30 days from receipt of certified copy of order. Certified copies of the order be supplied to the parties as per rules. File be indexed and consigned to record room.
Announced
August 02, 2018
(G.K. Dhir) President
(Amrinder Singh Sidhu) Member
