BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL

FORUM AT BANGALORE (URBAN)

6^TH APRIL 2011

       PRESENT:- SRI.B.S.REDDY                      PRESIDENT           

                         SMT. M. YASHODHAMMA     MEMBER

                         SRI.A.MUNIYAPPA                MEMBER

O R D E R

SMT. M. YASHODHAMMA, MEMBER

             The complainants filed these complaints U/s. 12 of the C.P. Act of 1986 seeking direction against the Opposite Party (herein after called as OP) to refund whatever amount paid by them along with interest at 24% p.a. and compensation of Rs.2 lakhs and litigation costs on the allegations of deficiency in service.

          Since OP in both the complaints are common, the question involved, relief claimed being the same, in order to avoid the repetition of facts and multiplicity of reasonings, these cases are stand disposed by this common order.

2.      The brief averments as could be seen from the contents of these complaints are as under:

          These complainants became the members of the OP Society since the year from 1983 to 1986. OP formed a residential sites at their Chanakyapuri layout, (Nagawara, Cholanayakanahalli and Viswanathanagenahalli of Gangenahalli side) Bangalore. OP accepted their membership and collected the amount from the year 1983 to 1993 and gave the receipts and also issued provisional allotment letters as shown below in the chart. Thereafter OP failed to register the sites in favour of the complainants. For no fault of them complainants were made to suffer both mental agony and financial loss. For the convenience sake details of membership account No., measurement of site, amount paid by each complainant, date of payments are noted below in the chart.

3.      Though each one of these complainants have paid the huge amount towards sital value during the period 1983 to 1993, they were unable to reap the fruits of their investments because of the hostile attitude of the OP.  The repeated requests and demands made by the complainants to allot sites and register in their favour went in futile.  Thus these complainants felt deficiency in service on the part of the OP; as such they are advised to file these complaints seeking the reliefs stated above.

4.      After registration of the complaints notices are sent to OP.  Inspite of service of notice OP remained absent without any sufficient reason or caused.  Hence OP placed exparte.

5.      In order to substantiate the complaints averments the complainants filed their affidavit evidence and produced copy of the pass book, receipts issued by OP, copy of provisional allotment letters, cash receipts, correspondence made by OP, copy of the letter dated 11.10.2010, copy of the order of the Hon’ble High Court in WP No.5785/1996 (LA). Heard arguments of the complainants.

6.      It is the case of the complainants that they being lured away with the propaganda made by the OP who claims to be the House Building Co-Operative Society thought of becoming Members of the OP Society with a hope of getting a site.  OP assured them with an allotment of a residential site in the layout to be floated by them. The complainants with a fond hope of acquiring a site measuring 60 x 40 fts each of them; became the members of the OP society.  OP has also received the amounts for the period from the year 1983 to 1993, issued cash receipts and pass book. Further OP issued provisional allotment letter to these complainants in the years 1986 to 1987 itself by allotting a site at their Chanakyapuri layout at Nagavara, Cholanayakanahalli and Vishwanathanagenahalli of Gangenahalli. The details of membership No, measurement of sites, date of provisional allotment letter, total amount paid by these complainants, towards the sital value, date of payments are mentioned in the above said chart. OP has not disputed the fact of receipt of the said amount. The documents to that effect are produced by the complainants.  Now the grievances of these complainants is that though OP collected the entire membership fees and collected substantial amounts towards allotment of sites failed to execute and register the Sale deed as promised or to refund the amounts.  On 11.10.2010 and 12.10.2010 complainants visited OP requested to refund the amount by issuing letter along with interest. OP failed to give any acknowledgement for the letter, but assured repayment with interest within 15 days. Copy of the letters issued by each complainant is produced. Inspite of repeated requests when OP failed to register the site or to refund of amount with interest as promised, Complainant approached this forum.

7.      The unchallenged affidavit evidence of the complainants and the documents produced by the complainants corroborates the case of the complainant. There is nothing to discard the sworn testimony of the complainants. From the absence of the OP inspite of due service of due notice from this Forum we can draw the inference that OP admits all the allegations made by the complainant in toto. If OP is aware of the fact that it cannot register the site it could have fairly refunded the amount to the complainants.  Retention of amount by the OP for more than 18 years amounts to deficiency in service on the part of the OP.  We are satisfied that complainants are able to prove the deficiency in service against the OP. Under the circumstances we are of the considered view that the complainants are entitled for the relief of refund of amount paid towards sital value along with interest at 12% p.a. and compensation of Rs.50,000/- and litigation cost of Rs.1,000/-. Accordingly we proceed to pass the following:

ORDER