DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, GURGAON-122001.
Consumer Complaint No: 697 of 2010 Date of Institution: 01.09.2010 Date of Decision: 21.10.2015.
Sandeep Chatrath s/o Sh.Dharampal Chatrath R/o D-91, Second Floor, South City-II, Gurgaon.
……Complainant.
Versus
Vatika Landbase Pvt. Ltd, 7th Floor, Vatika Triangle, Sushant Lok, Phase-I, Gurgaon-122002.
..Opposite party
Complaint under Sections 12 & 14 of Consumer Protection Act,1986
BEFORE: SH.SUBHASH GOYAL, PRESIDENT.
SMT JYOTI SIWACH, MEMBER
SH.SURENDER SINGH BALYAN, MEMBER.
Present: Ms.Omwati Nagar, Adv for the complainant.
Sh. Mannu Jain, Adv for the opposite party.
ORDER SUBHASH GOYAL, PRESIDENT.
The case of the complainant, in brief, is that he booked a plot No.TP/NAVB/6th ST/55 in Jaipur Vatika Infocity with the opposite party on 18.02.2006 by paying booking amount of Rs.1,27,500/- and thereafter paid other installments and thus, paid a total sum of Rs.3,06,282/- which constitutes 25 % of the total cost of the plot. It has also been alleged that the said has not been developed so far and as such he requested the opposite party to refund the amount with interest but the opposite party failed to refund the same. Thus, non refund of the amount deposited by him tantamounts to deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. He prayed that the opposite party be directed to refund Rs.3,06,282/- with interest. He also sought compensation of Rs.75,000/- for harassment. The complaint is supported with an affidavit and the documents placed on file.
2 OP in its written reply has alleged that this Forum has no territorial jurisdiction as the property in dispute is situated at Jaipur and the Plot Buyer’s Agreement was also executed at Jaipur and no cause of action can be said to have been accrued within the territorial jurisdiction of this Forum. The opposite party issued several letters to the complainant asking him to deposit the balance sale consideration and ultimately the booking of the plot was cancelled on 11.05.2007 and the earnest amount of Rs.1,83,770.50 was forfeited in terms of Clause 4 of the Plot Buyer’s Agreement and thereafter the complainant approached the opposite party and deposited a sum of Rs.1,22,512.50 on 25.05.2007 which was accepted by the opposite party as a goodwill gesture and the booking of the complainant was restored on 08.06.2007 but the complainant again did not deposit the balance payment and the complainant was asked to deposit Rs.8,57,585.75 vide letter dated 20.11.2008 but in vain and thus, there was no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party.
3 We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record available on file carefully.
4 Therefore, from the facts and circumstances of the case, evidence on the file and the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, it emerges that the complainant has filed the present complaint against the OP alleging deficiency of service on their part on the ground that he booked a plot in Jaipur Vatika Infocity with the OP on 18.02.2006 and paid a total sum of Rs.3,06,282 which consists of 25 % of the total amount of the plot. It has been argued that the land has not been developed so far and as such the amount deposited by the complainant be refunded along with interest.
5 However, as per the contention of the opposite party this Forum has got no jurisdiction as the property in dispute is situated at Jaipur and the Plot Buyer’s Agreement was also executed at Jaipur and no cause of action can be said to have been accrued within the jurisdiction of this Forum. It was also argued that OP issued several letters to the complainant asking him to deposit the balance sale consideration and ultimately the booking of the complainant was cancelled on 11.05.2007 and the earnest money of Rs.1,83,770.50 was forfeited in terms of clause 4 of the Plot Buyer’s Agreement and thereafter the complainant approached the OP and deposited a sum of Rs.1,22,512.50 which was accepted by the OP as a goodwill gesture and the booking of the complainant was restored on 08.06.2007 but the complainant again did not deposit the balance payment and the complainant was asked to deposit Rs.8,57,585.75 vide letter dated 20.11.2008 but in vain and as such there was no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties.
6. Therefore, after going through the fact and circumstances of the case and the evidence placed on file we are of the opinion that this Forum has got the territorial jurisdiction as the opposite party i.e. Vatika Landbase Ltd, Mehrauli Gurgaon Road, Gurgaon had received Rs.1,22,512/- from the complainant and issued Receipt No.13811 dated 26.05.2007. The argument of learned counsel for the complainant that the plot has not been developed so far is totally whimsical and is not sustainable in the eye of law because the opposite party has placed on file some photographs showing existence of the residential houses.
7 It is also evident that complainant himself has not adhered to the payment schedule and his booking was cancelled due to non payment of the installments and the earnest amount of Rs.1,83,770 was forfeited and as such the complainant himself was at fault in not depositing the amount and no deficiency in service on the part of opposite party can be inferred.
8 However, since the amount is lying with the OP and the OP in the past also has also restored the plot of the complainant, therefore, to meet the ends of justice it is ordered that the opposite party shall restore the plot to the complainant subject to deposit of balance amount along with interest in terms of the letter of allotment within 30 days if the original plot is available and if the original plot is not available then OP shall allot alternative plot of the same size in the similar situated area and if any other plot is not available then to refund the amount deposited by the complainant with interest @ 9 % p.a. from the date of filing of the present complaint i.e. 01.09.2010 till realization. The complainant is also entitled to litigation expenses of Rs.3100/-. OP shall make the compliance of the order within 30 days from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. The parties concerned be communicated of the order accordingly and the file be consigned to the records after due compliance.
Announced (Subhash Goyal)
21.10.2015 President,
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Forum, Gurgaon
(Jyoti Siwach) (Surender Singh Balyan)
Member Member
