Karnataka

Bangalore Urban

CC/394/2021

Sri Pradeep Kumar - Complainant(s)

Versus

VSan Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

Sri. Rangaswamy .C

20 Jul 2022

ORDER

Complaint filed on:29.07.2021

Disposed on:20.07.2022

                                                                         

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION AT BANGALORE (URBAN)

 

DATED 20^TH DAY OF JULY 2022

 

PRESENT:-  SRI.K.S.BILAGI	:	PRESIDENT
SMT.RENUKADEVI DESHPANDE	:	MEMBER
SRI.H.JANARDHAN	:	MEMBER

                          

                      

COMPLAINT No.394/2021

 

COMPLAINANT	Sri.Pradeep Kumar, S/o.Late Thamanna Gowda, Aged about 63 years, R/at 987/2611, Bhuvaneshwar Nilaya, Behind BDO Office, Mandya City 571 401.
(Sri Rangaswamy Adv.)
OPPOSITE PARTY	VSan Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., Rep. by its Executive Director, R/at No.11 & 12, 2nd Floor, P.S.Plaza, Jawaharlal Street, Platform Road, Sheshadripuram, Bengaluru 560 020.
(Sri.R.Hari Prasad, Adv.)

                               

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ORDER

SRI.K.S.BILAGI, PRESIDENT

This complaint  has been filed under section 35 of C.P.Act, 2019 (herein referred as “Act”) for the following reliefs.

1. Direct the opposite party to pay Rs.5,64,000/-
2. Further compensation up to realization of amount at the rate of 18% per annum as compensation as for the harassment, inconvenience, frustration and mental agony suffered by the complainant
3. Rs.5000/- towards costs of legal notice and other expenses.
4. Such other reliefs as this Hon’ble Forum deems fit.

2.The brief facts of the complaint are as follows:

The complainant having paid the entire consideration of Rs.2,60,000/- to the OP by means of a cheque dated 30.09.2014 applied for allotment and registration of the site measuring 30’X40’.  Even though OP has issued Confirmation Letter and Congratulation letter who availed to execute the sale deed.

3. It is further case of the complainant that on 14.10.2016, OP has executed documents in favour of the complainant i.e., renewal of Memorandum of Understand.  OP has issued letter dated 31.12.2016 tendering apology for delay in deliver of site.  However on 19.09.2017 OP has executed renewal and Memorandum of understanding in favour of the complainant, but the OP failed to execute the sale deed.  Therefore complainant by serving legal notice dated 01.12.2020, called upon the OP to refund Rs.2,60,000/- with interest.  OP failed to hide the request of the complainant.  This action of the OP amounts to deficiency in service.  Hence this complaint.

 

4. In response to the notice, OP appeared and filed version.  This complaint is filed with an intention to harass the OP and to extract money.  Complainant having approached the OP on 29.09.2014 booked a site No.901 for total consideration of Rs.2,60,000/-.  OP admits receipt of payment of Rs.2,60,000/- execution of Memorandum of Understanding dated 14.10.2016, but project could not be completed for want of Conversation order and due to demonetization.  The OP admits receipt of legal notice of the complainant dated 1.12.2020.  In fact the OP offered an exchange of site in another project which was ready for registration.  But the complainant not only disagreed but filed this complaint.  OP ready to execute the registered sale deed within six months from the date of consent of the complainant.  Under such circumstances the OP is not in a position to refund the amount and not liable to pay the interest.  OP requested to dismiss the complaint.

 

5. The complainant filed his affidavit evidence of and relies on 11 documents. The OP has filed his affidavit evidence. Both parties have filed written arguments.

 

6.         Heard the oral arguments of the advocate for the complainant only. Perused the records.

 

7. The following points arise for our consideration are as under:-

1. Whether there is deficiency of service on the part of the OP?
2. Whether the complainant is entitled to the reliefs sought for?
3. What order?

 

8. Our answer to the above points are as under:

       Point No.1:- Affirmative.

      Point no.2:- Affirmative in part.

      Point No.3:-As per the final order.

 

REASONS

9. Point Nos.1 and 2:. In order to avoid repitation of discussion, these two points have been taken into common consideration.

 

10. Majority of facts are not in dispute between the parties.  The payment of Rs.2,60,000/- by the complainant to the OP by means of a cheque dated 30.09.2014 has been proved from Annexure A2 receipt and annexure A3 Congradulation letter.  The OP has also issued a letter intimating DC conversion letter Cauvery project.  Both the parties have entered into Memorandum of understanding dated 14.10.2016 as per Annexure A5.  OP had addressed annexure A6 intimating new policies of the government to the complainant.  Lateron, both the parties have entered into renewal of Memorandum of Understanding dated 19.09.2017 as per Annexure A7, but the site was not registered.

 

 

11. Therefore the complainant by issuing annexure A8 dated 08.11.2018 called upon the OP to refund his amount.  Whereas, OP had sent a letter as per annexure A9 to the complainant stating that the different projects are under the process of conversion.  It means that, none of the project has received conversion letter. However, by addressing letter dated 08.03.2019, the complainant called upon the OP to refund his amount by canceling his booking. Despite legal notice dated 01.12.2020 the OP failed to refund the amount.

 

12. Even though OP has filed affidavit evidence reiterating the facts pleaded in the version.  OP has not produced any documents to show that project was ready for execution of registered sale deed in favour of the complainant.  The OP has taken vague contention only to dupe the complainant.  The act of OP in non refund of the amount of Rs.2,60,000/- amounts to deficiency in service.

 

13. Complainant not only claims refund of Rs.2,60,000/-, but he claims Rs.3,04,200/- towards interest and further interest at 18% p.a., as compensation.  The advocate for the complainant himself relies on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Civil Appeal No.6044/2019 in the matter between Experion Developers Pvt. Ltd., -vs- Sushma Ashok Shiroor with Civil Appeal No.7149/219 dated 07.04.2022.

 

14. The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India was pleased to reduce the rate of interest at 9% p.a., as would be seen from para 22.2 of the Judgement.  Even though complainant claims 24% interest on Rs.2,60,000/- from the date of payment till realization, in view of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme court of India and considering the prevailing rate of interest in the bank, it is proper to award interest at 9% p.a., on Rs.2,60,000/- from the date of payment i.e., 30.09.2014 till realization.  The claim of interest at 24% p.a., is exorbitant.  The OP is liable to refund Rs.2,60,000/- to the complainant with interest at 9% p.a., from 30.09.2014 till realization.

 

15. Point no.3:-.  In view of the discussions referred above, the OP is liable to refund Rs.2,60,000/- with interest at 9% pa., from 30.09.2014 till realization as compensation.  The cost of litigation is quantified at Rs.5,000/-.  The complaint requires to be allowed in part. Accordingly, we proceed to pass the following

 

 

O R D E R

1. The complaint is allowed in part.
2. The OP shall refund Rs.2,60,000/- with interest at 9% p.a., from 30.09.2014 to till realization to the complainant and OP shall pay Rs.5,000/- towards cost of the litigation.
3. The OP shall comply this order within 60 days from this date, failing which the OP shall pay interest  at 12% p.a. on Rs.2,60,000/- after expiry of 60 days from this date till payment.
4. Furnish the copy of this order to both the parties and return extra copies of pleadings and documents.

 

(Dictated to the Stenographer, got it transcribed and corrected, pronounced in the Open Commission on this 20^th  day of July, 2022)

                                                          

(Renukadevi Deshpande) MEMBER

(H.Janardhan) MEMBER

(K.S.Bilagi) PRESIDENT

 

 

Documents produced by the Complainant-P.W.1 are as follows:

 

 

1.	Ex.A1: Copy of the cheque details
2.	Ex.P2: Receipt dated 29.09.2014
3.	Ex.P3:Confirmation and Congratulation letter dated 21.10.2014
4.	Ex.P4:Information letter dated 15.07.2015
5.	Ex.P5: Memorandum of understanding dated 14.10.2016
6	Ex.P6: Apology letter dated 31.12.2016
7	Ex.P7: Memorandum of understanding dated 19.09.2017
8	Ex.P8: Letter dated 02.11.2018
9	Ex.P9: OP letter
10	Ex.P10: Letter dated 08.03.2019
11	Ex.P11: Legal notice dated 01.12.2020

 

Documents produced by the representative of opposite party – R.W.1 :

 

• NIL -

 

 

(Renukadevi  Deshpande)      MEMBER

(H.Janardhan) MEMBER

(K.S.Bilagi)        PRESIDENT