Date of Filing: 14.05.2008 Date of Order:12.08.2008 BEFORE THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM SESHADRIPURAM BANGALORE-20 Dated: 12TH DAY OF AUGUST 2008 PRESENT Sri. S.S. NAGARALE, B.A, LL.B. (SPL.), President. Smt. D. LEELAVATHI, M.A.LL.B, Member. Sri. BALAKRISHNA. V. MASALI, B.A, LL.B. (SPL.), Member. COMPLAINT NO: 1129 OF 2008 B.R. Suraj S/o. B.N. Rathan Balaraj No. 1043, Opp. Indira Nursing Home 25th Main, BSK 2nd Stage Bangalore 560 070 Complainant V/S Vishwabharathi House Building Co-op. Society Ltd., (V.H.B.C.S.) No. 35, Rathna Vilas Road Basavanagudi Bangalore 560 004 Rep. by the President Sri S. Krishna Bhat Opposite Party ORDER By the President Sri. S.S. Nagarale This is a complaint filed under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act. The facts of the case are that the opposite party is a registered society under the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act. Complainant is a member of the opposite party society. Complainant paid total amount of Rs. 5,66,000/- to the opposite party for the allotment of site measuring 60X80. It is the case of the complainant that he has paid sum of Rs. 6,00,000/- by way of cash in the month of November 2007 to the opposite party society through President Mr. B. Krishna Bhat and Manjunath. Society has not issued receipt to the said amount. Complainant requested the opposite party to register sale deed of the site. Opposite party did not show any interest and failed to execute the sale deed. Hence, the complaint. 2. Notice was issued to opposite party. The opposite party put in appearance through advocate and defence version filed admitting that complainant has paid amount of Rs. 5,66,000/-. It is denied by the opposite party that complainant had paid Rs. 6,00,000/- by cash in the month of November 2007 to the opposite party through its President B. Krishna Bhat and Manjunath. The opposite party submitted that society is willing and ready to refund the site value deposited by the complainant. There is no agreement to pay interest on the said amount. Society is not in a position to allot and put the complainant in possession of site since no site is available in the layout moreover number of disputes and legal proceedings are going on in various courts. Under the circumstances society is left with no alternative other than to refund the amount. It is stated in the version that on the next date of hearing opposite party will give cheque to the complainant. 3. The complainant has produced affidavit. Arguments are heard. 4. The points for consideration are: a. Whether the complainant is entitled for the refund of the amount with interest? b. Whether the opposite party can be directed to execute sale deed in respect of site measuring 60X80? 5. The learned advocate of the opposite party fairly submitted that opposite party had received Rs. 5,66,000/- from the complainant for VHC layout and as regards this payment is concerned there is no dispute between the parties. The learned advocate submitted that opposite party has not received Rs. 6,00,000/- in cash as alleged by the complainant. The complainant has stated in his complaint that he has paid Rs. 6,00,000/- by way of cash in the month of November 2007 to the opposite party society through its President and society has not issued any receipt to that amount. If this is the case it is very difficult to accept and believe that complainant has paid Rs. 6,00,000/- in cash. It is unfortunate that how could complainant pay such a huge amount without obtaining receipt. Except the statement made in the complaint there is no any other record or evidence or proof to show that complainant has paid Rs. 6,00,000/- in cash in the month of November 2007 to the opposite party. Therefore, in the absence of any proof it is very difficult to direct the opposite party to pay Rs. 6,00,000/-. As regards payment of Rs. 5,66,000/- is concerned there is no dispute between the parties. The opposite party has clearly admitted in the version and opposite party is ready and willing to pay the amount. The opposite party submitted in the version that in the next date of hearing it will give cheque in favour of the complainant. As regards allotment of site is concerned the opposite party society is not in a position to allot and register sale deed in favour of the complainant since no site is available in the layout formed. The opposite party has submitted that various disputes and litigations are pending in various courts including High Court, Supreme Court and Civil Courts. So under these circumstances the opposite party society is not in a position to allot any site to its members. The opposite party society has come forward to refund the amount. Therefore, it is also better for the complainant to receive the amount instead of insisting for the allotment of site. The opposite party society having enjoyed the amount received from the complainant and utilized the amount it is bound to pay the interest on the amount received from the complainant. Honble State Commission and National Commission in several cases are granting 18% interest p.a. on the deposited amount. Therefore, I feel in this case also it is just, fair and reasonable to grant 18% interest p.a. on the amount paid by the complainant to the opposite party from the respective dates of deposits. In the result I proceed to pass the following: ORDER 6. The complaint is allowed. The opposite party society is directed to refund Rs. 5,66,000/- to the complainant with 18% interest p.a. from the respective dates of deposits made by the complainant till realization. 7. Complainant is also entitled for Rs. 4,000/- towards costs of the present proceedings from the opposite party society. 8. Send the copy of this Order to both the parties free of costs immediately. 9. Pronounced in the Open Forum on this 12TH DAY OF AUGUST 2008. Order accordingly, PRESIDENT We concur the above findings. MEMBER MEMBER CV
Consumer Court Lawyer
Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.
