BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SAS NAGAR, MOHALI
Consumer Complaint No.649 of 2014
Date of institution: 11.11.2014
Date of Decision: 26.06.2015
Simerjeet Kaur wife of Jaswant Singh Virk, resident of House No.996, Sector 69, SAS Nagar, Mohali.
……..Complainant
Versus
1. The Sky Rock City Welfare Society, SCO 672, Sector 70, Mohali, Punjab through its President Navjeet Singh resident of House No.67, Sector 69, Mohali, Punjab.
2. Parminder Kaur wife of Navjeet Singh, The General Secretary of the Sky Rock City Welfare Society, resident of House No.67, Sector 69, Mohali Punjab and Employee of Sky Rock City.
3. Sky Rock City Welfare Society (Regd.) SCO 672, Sector 70, Mohali Punjab and its Executive Members.
………. Opposite Parties
Complaint under Section 12 of the
Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
CORAM
Mrs. Madhu. P. Singh, President.
Shri Amrinder Singh, Member.
Mrs. R.K. Aulakh, Member.
Present: Complainant in person.
None for the OPs.
(Mrs. Madhu P. Singh, President)
ORDER
The complainant has filed the present complaint seeking following direction to the Opposite Parties (for short ‘the OPs’) to:
(a) refund her the deposited amount of Rs.5,91,000/- with interest thereon @ 14% per annum.
(b) pay her compensation to the tune of Rs.1,00,000/- for harassment, mental agony and tension.
(c) pay her Rs.10,000/- as litigation costs.
The case of the complainant is that the OPs vide advertisement Ex.C-2 motivated the complainant to become member of their society. The complainant applied for enrolment of Member of the OPs. She was allotted membership and Registration No.628/LC 950 by the OPs vide Ex.C-3 and Rs.10,000/- was p-aid by the complainant as Membership fee vide receipt dated 20.10.2011 Ex.C-5. The complainant booked a plot of 250 sq. yards by paying Rs.1,66,000/- vide receipt dated 21.10.2011 Ex.C-4. On demand from the OPs the complainant also deposited another amount of Rs.4,15,000/- vide receipt Ex.C-6. Thereafter the complainant came to know that the OPs does not have a license to develop the project. On this the complainant sought refund of the deposited amount from the OPs vide application dated 28.02.2013 Ex.C-8 followed by reminder dated 28.10.2014. Till the filing of the complainant the OPs have not refunded the deposited amount to the complainant. Thus, alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs, the complainant has filed the present complaint.
2. After admission of the complaint, notice was sent to the OP. Shri Hittan Nehra, Advocate appeared for the OP on 26.12.2014 and filed power of attorney. The matter was adjourned to 07.01.2015 for filing written reply by the OP. Reply was not filed rather the OP moved two application for dismissal of the complaint on the ground (i) the complaint is pre mature and (ii) that there exists an arbitration clause in the terms and conditions governing the relationship between the parties and, therefore, the complaint is not maintainable. Both the applications were dismissed and thereafter the OP has omitted to file any reply to the complaint and the complaint was proceeded against the OP.
3. To succeed in the complaint, the complainant proved on record affidavit Ex.CW-1/1 and tendered in evidence documents Ex.C-1 to C-9.
4. To rebut the allegations of the complainant, the OPs tendered the affidavit of Navjeet Singh Ex.OP-1/1 and thereafter no other document was tendered in evidence.
5. We have heard the complainant and also carefully gone through the case file. Neither the written arguments were filed by the OPs nor did anybody appear on their behalf to address the oral arguments.
6. It is evident that the complainant is a Member of the society since 20.10.2011 and has paid the membership amount of Rs.5000/- vide Ex.C-5 and has further made various payments against the sale consideration of plot measuring 250 sq. yards @ Rs.8,300/- per sq. yards. In all the complainant has deposited a total sum of Rs.5,86,000/- on various occasions vide receipts Ex.C-4 to C-6. As per terms and conditions mentioned on the overleaf of the receipts Ex.C-4 to C-6, the plot was to be handed over to the complainant not later than three years of the registration/requisition. The complainant is given liberty to work out from the scheme after seeking refund of the deposited amount alongwith 8% rate of interest per annum after three years from the registration. The grievance of the complainant is that since there was no development of the land, she has made a request vide Ex.C-8 dated 28.02.2013 which was duly signed and acknowledged by the OPs as is evident from the stamp, signature and date mentioned by the OPs on the body of the said letter. Still the amount has not been refunded. After waiting for one and half year, when no response came from the OPs, the complainant sent another request letter dated 28.10.2014 Ex.C-9 for refund of the deposited amount. This letter has again been duly acknowledged by the OPs as is evident from the stamp and signatures of the OPs appearing on the body of the letter. Even after receiving the refund request date 28.02.2013 and not abiding by their own agreed term of giving possession within 3 years from the date of registration, the complainant forced under the circumstances has filed the present complaint raising a consumer dispute as the complainant is a consumer and the OPs are service provider.
8. Therefore, the issue of dispute between the parties is non refund of the deposited amount. The complainant has deposited a total sum of Rs.5,86,000/- as part of the sale consideration of 250 sq. yards plot @ Rs.8,500/- per sq. yard alongwith Rs.5,000/- as membership fee.
9. As per terms and conditions mentioned in the receipt Ex.C-4 to C-6 the complainant was well within her right to seek the refund. Therefore while invoking the said right, the complainant has made a written request dated 28.02.2013 followed by letter dated 28.10.2014 for seeking refund of the deposited amount. Since the OPs have failed to handover the possession within the agreed time frame, the complainant has unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs.
10. It is proved on record that the OPs have not handed over the possession of the plot to the complainant. The OPs in the present case seems to have the cake and eat it too as they have received substantial amount for the plot and have not got even the necessary sanctions in their favour to develop the plot. The OPs are enjoying the deposited money of the complainant as well as the land is also in their possession. On the other hand, the complainant after having paid substantial amount of consideration is still without any inch of land in her favour. Such type of unscrupulous act on the part of the developer needs to be dealt with heavy hands who after grabbing the money from the complainant, enjoy and utilized her money but does not have necessary sanction in their favour to develop the plot. Thus, the complainant cannot be now deprived of her right to walk out from the schema and seek refund as the same right has been granted to the complainant by the OPs. The act of the OPs on uninterrupted and without hindrance enjoyment of the complainant’s money is an act of unfair trade practice and non refund of the same despite request letter dated 28.02.2013 followed by reminder dated 28.10.2014 is an act of deficiency in service writ large on their part. In support of our these findings we take reliance from the decision of Hon’ble National Commission in M/s. Mukherji Builders & Construction Corporation Vs. Dr. (Mrs.) Annupurna Mishra, 2013(3) CLT 109. The complaint, therefore, deserves to be allowed and the complainant deserves to be compensated.
9. Thus, the complaint is allowed with the following directions to the OPs to:
- to refund to the complainant Rs.5,86,000/- (Rs. Five lacs eighty six thousand only) deposited as a part payment against sale of 250 sq. yard plot at the promised rate of Rs.8,500/- per sq. yard. The said amount be refunded to the complainant alongwith interest @ 8% per annum w.e.f. 20.10.2012 i.e. after one year of the date of registration till realization.
(b) to pay a lump sum compensation of Rs.50,000/- (Rs. Fifty thousand only) for mental agony, harassment and costs of litigation.
Compliance of this order be made within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. Certified copies of the order be furnished to the parties forthwith free of cost and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room.
Pronounced.
June 26, 2015.
(Mrs. Madhu P. Singh)
President
(Amrinder Singh)
Member
(Mrs. R.K. Aulakh)
Member
