Haryana

StateCommission

CC/29/2015

SHWETA SHARMA - Complainant(s)

Versus

BPTP LTD. - Opp.Party(s)

ROHIT GOSWAMI

07 Apr 2017

ORDER

 

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, HARYANA, PANCHKULA.

 

                                                Complaint No.29 of 2015

                                                       Date of Institution: 30.03.2015                  Date of Decision: 07.04.2017

 

Shweta Sharma W/o Mr. Satydev Kaushik R/o Flat NO.102, Gukul Apartments, Sector-45, Faridabad-121010.

…..Complainant

 

Versus

 

M/s BPTP Ltd. M-11, Middle Circle, Cannaught Circus, New Delhi-110001 Also at: Plot No.15, Udyog Bhawan Phase-IV, Gurgaon 122015.

          …..Opposite Party

 

CORAM:             Mr. R.K.Bishnoi, Judicial Member.

                   Mrs.Urvashi Agnihotri, Member.                                    

For the parties:  Mr.Rohit Goswami, Advocate counsel for the complainant.

                             Mr. Hemant Saini, Advocate counsel for the opposite party.

                            

O R D E R

 

R.K.BISHNOI, JUDICIAL MEMBER :-

It is alleged by complainant that she booked a shop NO.OF-17A measuring 478 sq. feet with Opposite Party (O.P.) valuing Rs.16,96,900/- against initial payment of Rs.1,69,690/- on 24.07.2008 for earning  her livelihood.  Vide letter dated 20.08.2008 allotment was made and it was told that possession would be delivered within 36 months thereof.  She deposited entire consideration within 10 months of allotment, as detailed in the complaint, but, possession was not delivered. So OP be directed to grant relief as mentioned below:-

“a.     Get the sale deed of the Shop being Unit No.OF-17A in The Next Door, Sector-76, Parklands, Faridabad” registered in favour of the complainant and hand over the possession of the Shop to the Complainant or alternatively, refund the complainant the entire amount paid by the complainant till date alongwith interest @ 24% p.a.

b.      Pay the complainant compensation for delay in handing over possession of the shop in accordance with clause 3 of Shop Buyer’s Agreement alongwith interest @ 24% p.a. till the date of payment.

c.       Pay the complainant interest @ 24% p.a. on Rs.2,92,504/- (Rupees Two lacs Ninety Two Thousand Five Hundred and Four only) i.e. the amount deposited by complainant on 04.03.2014 till the date of registration of sale deed (in case of order of refund of the entire amount as per prayer clause (i), the complainant be directed to refund Rs.2,92,504/- alongwith interest @ 24% p.a.)

d.      Refund the complainant the amount of Rs.61,877/- (Rupees Sixty One Thousand Eight Hundred Seventy Seven only) of Enhanced External Development charges which has been charged illegally without any justification alongwith interest @ 24% p.a.

e.      Refund the complainant Electricity connection charges of Rs.60,000/- (Rupees Sixty Thousand only) which has been charged illegally without any justification alongwith interest @ 24% p.a.

f.       Refund the complainant Power Back up charges of Rs.75,000/- (Rupees Seventy Five Thousand only) which has been charged illegally without any justification alongwith interest 2 24% p.a.

g.      Pay the complainant a sum of Rs.20,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty Lac only) as compensation for harassment and mental agony caused to complainant due to delay in handing over of possession of shop, non-payment of compensation for delay in possession, non-registration of sale deed and the Respondent company’s authoritative manner in pressurizing complainant to deposit/submit the illegal demands raised by Respondent company.”

2.      O.P. filed reply admitting allotment, but, alleged that she did not fulfil the conditions stipulated in agreement for possession as well as execution of sale deed.  Possession was offered to her in the month of February 2014, but, she did not execute relevant documents, so there is no fault on their part and complaint be dismissed.

3.      Both the parties have led their evidence. Arguments heard. File perused.

4.      Learned counsel for the complainant argued that the shop was booked for earning livelihood as specifically alleged in complaint so it cannot be considered that it was for commercial purpose.  She is covered by definition of consumer and this complaint is maintainable

5.      However there is no dispute that in Para NO.3 of the complaint it is alleged that shop was booked for earning livelihood, but, she did not produce any evidence to prove this fact. When complainant entered witness box it was no-where stated that this shop was booked in commercial complex for earning livelihood. Hon’ble National Commission  has clearly opined in  Revision Petition NO.4044 of 2009 titled as M/s  JCB India Ltd. Vs. M/s Chandan Traders & Ors. Decided on 19.02.2015 that simple averments that anything was taken for earning livelihood is not sufficient to presume this fact to be true. It is specifically opined therein that concerned person is supposed to prove that said article was to be used by him or her for earning livelihood.  Complainant no-where alleged that what is she doing and what business was to be run in this shop.  It is also not alleged that she was not having any source of income and particular type of business was to be run by her.  When these facts are missing it cannot be presumed that the shop was booked for earning livelihood.  These views are also fortified by the opinion of  Hon’ble National Commission in Revision petition No.421 of 2015 titled Unicity projects and Anr. Vs. Ranjan Bhatia decided on 09.10.2015, Pradeep Singh Pahal Vs. TDI Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. CPJ 1 (2016) 219. When she is not covered by definition of consumer, complaint is not maintainable and this commission can’t adjudicate upon this dispute because judgment without jurisdiction is nullity as opined by Hon’ble National Commission expressed in Revision Petition No.317 of 1994 titled as Haryana Urban Development Authority Vs. Vipan Kumar Kohli decided on 19.01.1995.  Resultantly complaint fails and the same is hereby dismissed.

 

April, 07th, 2017

Mrs.Urvashi Agnihotri, Member, Addl.Bench

R.K.Bishnoi, Judicial Member Addl.Bench

 

S.K.