Chandigarh

StateCommission

CC/44/2022

Attar Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s Gupta Builders and Promoters Pvt. Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Tejinder Pal Singh Adv.

03 Oct 2022

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

U.T., CHANDIGARH

 

Complaint case No.	:	44  of 2022
Date of Institution	:	23.05.2022
Date of Decision	:	03.10.2022

Attar Singh son of Shri Gurdev Singh, age 41 years, resident of house no. 422, village Ratouli, District Yamuna Nagar, Haryana. (Adhaar Card no. 6851-7921-3676 and Mobile no. 90179-21508).

 ……Complainant

V e r s u s

1. M/s Gupta Builders and Promoters Pvt. Limited, Registered and Corporate Office at SCO No.196-197, Ground Floor, Sector 34-A, Chandigarh through its Managing Director/Authorized Representative (email: info@gbpgroup.in)
2. Satish Gupta, Managing Director, M/s Gupta Builders and Promoters Pvt. Limited, Registered and Corporate office at SCO NO. 196-197, Ground Floor, Sector 34-A, Chandigarh. (email: info@gbpgroup.in)
3. Ramam Gupta, Director, M/s Gupta Builders and Promoters Pvt. Limited, Registered and Corporate Office at SCO NO. 196-197, Ground Floor, Sector 34-A, Chandigarh. (email: info@gbpgroup.in)
4. Pardeep Gupta, Director, M/s Gupta Builder and Promoters Pvt. Limited, Registered and Corporate Office at SCO NO. 196-197, Ground Floor, Sector 34-A, Chandigarh. (email: info@gbpgroup.in)
5. Anupam Gupta, Director, M/s Gupta Builders and Promoters Pvt. Limited, Registered and Corporate Office at SCO NO. 196-197, Ground Floor, Sector 34-A, Chandigarh. (email: info@gbpgroup.in)
6. Ajay Kumar (Adhaar card no. 5173-9726-7713), Authorized Signatory, M/s Gupta Builders and Promoters Pvt. Limited, Registered and Corporate office at Sco NO. 196-197, Ground Floor, Sector 34-A, Chandigarh. (email: info@gbpgroup.in)

 .... Opposite Parties

 

BEFORE:     JUSTICE RAJ SHEKHAR ATTRI, PRESIDENT

                   MRS. PADMA PANDEY, MEMBER

                   MR. PREETINDER SINGH, MEMBER

 

 Present: -   Sh.Tejinder Pal Singh, Advocate for the complainant.

 Opposite parties exparte vide order dated 25.07.2022.

 

PER JUSTICE RAJ SHEKHAR ATTRI, PRESIDENT

                   This complaint has been filed by the complainant, seeking refund of the amount of Rs.1,60,00,000/- paid by him to the opposite parties, towards purchase of commercial space bearing no.106, 1^st Floor, measuring 2240.77 square feet, in their project named - “GBP Centrum”,  Village Singhpura, Zirakpur, Mohali, Punjab. Agreement to sell dated 06.11.2019, Annexure C-2 was executed between the parties, in respect of the unit in question. It has been averred that though possession of the unit in question was to be delivered latest 31.12.2022, yet,  it has come to the knowledge of the complainant that the project in question has been abandoned; that the Directors of the Company are absconding and left the country; and that many criminal cases have been registered against them. It has been stated that despite the fact that the opposite parties had issued  various cheques towards assured rent, yet, except two cheques, all other cheques pertaining to the year 2022 were dishonoured by the bank(s) concerned for want of sufficient funds. It has been averred that since the opposite parties have abandoned the project and there is no possibility of delivery of possession of the unit in the near future, as such, the amount paid by the complainant i.e. Rs.1,60,00,000/- be refunded alongwith interest, compensation and litigation expenses. Hence this complaint.

2.           Despite service, through email dated 03.08.2022 and also through publication dated 05.07.2022 in the newspaper namely ‘Rozana Chardikala,  none put in appearance on behalf of the opposite parties, as a result whereof, they were proceeded against exparte vide order dated 25.07.2022.
3.           The complainant led evidence, in support of his case.
4.           We have heard the Counsel for the complainant and have gone through the evidence and record of this case, very carefully.
5.           Counsel for the complainant vehemently contended that since the opposite parties have abandoned the project; the Directors of the company have left the Country; and there is no possibility of completion of the construction and development activities at the project site in the near future, as such, there is no choice left with the complainant, then to get his amount back. 
6.           It may be stated here that we have gone through the record of this case, and found that vide allotment letter dated 06.11.2019, Annexure C-4, the unit in question was sold to the complainant by the opposite parties. On the very same day, agreement to sell dated 06.11.2019, Annexure C-2 and addendum agreement dated 06.11.2019, Annexure  C-3 were also executed between the parties, which reveals that the opposite parties have sold the unit in question to the complainant, for a total sale consideration of Rs.2,69,62,523/-, possession whereof is to be delivered latest by 31.12.2022, as per clause 7 of the said agreement. At the same time, buy back option was also made available by the opposite parties to the complainant, vide letter dated 06.11.2019, Annexure C-5. It is also coming out from the record that thereafter, under the promise made by the opposite parties regarding payment of rental amount, some cheques were handed over to the complainants, and out of that only two cheques were honoured and the remaining stood bounced, on account of insufficient funds.     
7.           It may be stated here that in the instant case, there is nothing on record that the complainant defaulted any due payment, in respect of the unit in question.  On the other hand, Counsel for the complainant has contended with vehemence that there was no default on the part of the complainant, while making payments, as demanded by the opposite parties, against the unit in question, yet, the opposite parties have abandoned the project and the Directors thereof have also disappeared. It is significant to mention here that the allegations leveled by the complainant, through his Counsel, to the effect that the project stood abandoned by the opposite parties; that the Directors of the company have left the Country; that construction and development activities have not been completed at the project site; and that there was  no default on the part of the complainant in making payments in respect of unit in question, have gone unrebutted, as the opposite parties, chose not to put in appearance, despite service, as a result whereof they were proceeded against exparte.  
8.           It is settled law that onus to prove the stage and status of construction and development work at the project site and that all the permissions/approvals have been obtained in respect thereof, is on the builder/developer. It was so said by the Hon’ble National Commission, in Emaar MGF Land Limited and another Vs. Krishan Chander Chandna, First Appeal No.873 of 2013 decided on 29.09.2014. In the present case, in case, the development/construction activities are being undertaken at the project site and the project is not abandoned, then it was for the opposite parties, which could be said to be in possession of the best evidence, to produce cogent and convincing documentary evidence, in the shape of the reports and affidavits of the Engineers/Architects, as they could be said to be the best persons, to testify, as to whether, all these development/ construction activities are being undertaken or not, but as stated above, the opposite parties even failed to put in appearance despite service, what to speak of contesting the allegations leveled by the complainant, by way of filing written reply and evidence. It is therefore held that in the absence of rebuttal to the allegations made by the complainant, in his complaint, the opposite parties have attracted an adverse inference that they have nothing to say in their defence. 
9.           Hard earned money to the tune of Rs.1,60,00,000/- was paid by the complainant with a hope to have his own unit. However, his hopes were dashed to the ground when he came to know that the project stood abandoned by the opposite parties and that their Directors have fled away, leaving the project midway.  From the peculiar circumstances of this case, it has been proved that the opposite parties made false representations, which were materially incorrect and were made in such a way that the complainant, to whom it was made, was entitled to rely upon it and he may act in reliance on it. The complainant is thereby involved in disadvantageous contracts with the developer and suffered financial loss, mental agony and physical harassment. All the facts established that from the very inception there was intent to induce the complainant to enter into the agreements, referred to above, and also intent to deceive him, which act amounts to grave deficiency in providing service, negligence and adoption of unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite parties, which has definitely caused a lot of mental agony, harassment and financial loss to the complainant. Thus, keeping in mind the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case, we are of the considered opinion that if we order refund of amount of Rs.1,60,00,000/- paid by the complainant alongwith interest @9% p.a. that will meet the ends of justice. 
10.           For the reasons recorded above, this complaint is partly accepted with costs. The opposite parties, jointly and severally, are directed as under:-

1. Refund the amount of Rs.1,60,00,000/- to the complainant, alongwith compensation by way of interest @9% p.a., without deducting any TDS, from the respective dates of deposits onwards, within a period of 30 days, from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order, failing which, thereafter, the said amount shall carry 3% penal interest i.e. 12% p.a. (9% p.a. plus (+) 3% p.a.), from the date of default till realization.

2. Pay compensation to the tune of Rs.1,00,000/- for causing mental agony and physical harassment to the complainant; deficiency in providing service and adoption of unfair trade practice and also cost of litigation to the tune of Rs.35,000/- to the complainant, within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order, failing which, the said amount shall carry interest @9% p.a. from the date of default till realization.

11.           Certified Copies of this order be sent to the parties, free of charge.
12.           The file be consigned to Record Room, after completion

Pronounced

03.10.2022

Sd/-

[JUSTICE RAJ SHEKHAR ATTRI]

PRESIDENT

 

 

Sd/-

 (PADMA PANDEY)

          MEMBER

 

 

Sd/-

 (PREETINDER SINGH)

MEMBER

 

Rg.