COMPLAINT FILED: 04.02.2011

DISPOSED ON: 23.04.2011

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL

FORUM AT BANGALORE (URBAN)

23^RD 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 complainant filed this complaint U/s. 12 of the C.P. Act of 1986 seeking direction against the Opposite Party (herein after called as OP) to refund Rs.42,000/- along with interest at 24% p.a. and compensation of Rs.50,000/- and litigation cost on the allegations of deficiency in service on the part of the OP.

2.      The brief averments made in the complaint are as follows:

          The complainant became the member of the OP Society in the year 1983 under the scheme for allotment of residential site measuring 30 X 40 fts. OP accepted the share fee and membership fee and allotted Roll No.3755.  The complainant paid Rs.42,000/- on different dates from 21.09.1983 to 03.12.1994. The copy of the passbook issued by OP is produced. Complainant applied for a site in the proposed Gangenhalli layout formed by OP. Thereafter OP failed to allot any site in the said layout or in other layout.  Inspite of repeated requests OP failed to allot the site went on postponing to allot a site in the near future. On 05.01.2010 complainant got issued legal notice calling upon OP to allot a site.  There was no response.  Hence complainant felt deficiency in service against OP.  Under these circumstances he is advised to file this complaint for the necessary reliefs.

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 placed exparte.

4.      In order to substantiate the complaint averments the complainant filed his affidavit evidence and produced copy of the pass book extract, copy of the notice dated 05.01.2010.  Complainant filed his written arguments. OP did not participate in the proceedings. Heard arguments of the complainant.

5.      It is the case of the complainant that he being lured away with the propaganda made by the OP who claims to be the House Building Co-Operative Society thought of becoming a Member of the OP Society with a hope of getting a site.  OP assured him with an allotment of a residential site in the layout to be floated by OP at their Gangenhalli Layout. The complainant with a fond hope of acquiring a site measuring 30 x 40 ft; became the member of the OP society.  OP has also received the amount of Rs.42,000/- from the complainant for the period from the year 1983 to 1994,. To substantiate this fact complainant produced the passbook extract issued by OP. Though OP collected the entire membership fees and collected substantial amounts towards allotment of site failed to execute and register the Sale deed as promised or to refund the amount.  On 05.01.2010 complainant wrote a letter and visited OP requested to refund the amount along with interest. There was no response. Copy of the letter issued by 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.

6.      The unchallenged affidavit evidence of the complainant and the documents produced by the complainant corroborates the case of the complainant. There is nothing to discard the sworn testimony of the complainant. 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 complainant.  Retention of amount by the OP for more than 17 years amounts to deficiency in service on the part of the OP.  We are satisfied that complainant is able to prove the deficiency in service against the OP. Under the circumstances we are of the considered view that the complainant is 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