CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM – X

GOVERNMENT OF N.C.T. OF DELHI

Udyog Sadan, C – 22 & 23, Institutional Area

(Behind Qutub Hotel)

New Delhi – 110 016

Case No.838/2009

SH. KAUSHAL YADAV

S/O SH. AJIT SINGH YADAV

R/O 1625-E MAIN DHASA BUS STAND,

NAJAFGARH, NEW DELHI-110043

                                                            …………. COMPLAINANT                                                                                           

                                                Vs.

M/S M-TECH DEVELOPERS LIMITED,

ANS HOUSE, 144/2, ASHRAM,

MATHURA ROAD, NEW DELHI-110014

…………..RESPONDENT

                                                                                    Date of Order: 17.10.2016

O R D E R

A.S. Yadav – President   

The case of the complainant is that he booked an apartment in the future project of OP at Bhiwadi, Rajasthan and paid a sum of Rs.2,50,000/- on 14.10.06 and for that a receipt was issued however the same was wrongly issued in the name of Ms Komal and when it was brought to the notice OP, OP assured that the mistake will be rectified.  It is stated that even after 36 months of making the booking, complainant has not received any information about the status of the project from the OP which clearly shows that OP has induced the complainant for making the money.  Complainant sought refund of the amount alongwith interest and accordingly sent a legal notice dated 26.08.09, however, neither the amount was refunded nor the reply was received.  It is stated that there is deficiency in service on the part of OP.  It is prayed that OP be directed to refund Rs.2,50,000/- and also Rs.99,000/- towards interest @ 24% till filing of the complaint and compensation of Rs.1,50,000/-.

OP in reply took the plea that complainant is not a consumer and in fact complainant has invested money but due to the recession in the market, he is unable to sell the project and levelled false allegations against the OP and is seeking refund of the amount.  It is also stated that in fact the receipt is for Rs.2,20,000/- and not 2,50,000/-.  It is stated that there is no deficiency in service on the part of OP and in the rejoinder complainant has clarified that in fact a sum of Rs.2,20,000/- was paid and due to typographical mistake the amount was mentioned as Rs.2,50,000/-.

We have heard Ld. Counsel for the parties and carefully perused the record. 

The acknowledgement of the receipt placed on the record show that the OP has received a sum of Rs.2,20,000/- from complainant vide cheque on 14.10.06 and that acknowledgement is in the name of Mr. Kaushal however inadvertently in the receipt the name is mentioned as Komal because details and the cheque mentioned in the receipt are of the complainant.  It is proved from the statement of the complainant that even after passing of 36 months nothing was done towards completion of project.  After receiving of the initial amount, OP has not sent any letter regarding progress of the project.  It is a clear cut case of deficiency in service on the part of OP.

OP is directed to refund the amount of Rs.2,20,000/- alongwith interest @ 9% from December 2006.  OP is further directed to pay Rs.15,000/- towards compensation and Rs.5,000/- towards litigation expenses.

Let the order be complied within one month of the receipt thereof.  The complaint stands disposed of accordingly.

            Copy of order be sent to the parties, free of cost, and thereafter file be consigned to record room.

     (D.R. TAMTA)                     (RITU GARODIA)                        (A.S. YADAV)

        MEMBER                               MEMBER                                  PRESIDENT