| Final Order / Judgement | DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION PATIALA. Consumer Complaint No. 129 of 3.4.2019 Decided on: 5.11.2020 Amanpreet Singh S/o Sh.Baldev Singh R/o village and post office Daun Kalan, Tehsil and District Patiala. …………...Complainant Versus - M/s Nature Heights Infra Ltd., through its Director(s) Partner(s) Mr.Amit Kukkar, Mr.Gaurav Chhabra and Mr.Neeraj Thatai available at #9,Sunder Nagari, Hanumangarh Road, Abohar-152116, Punjab.
- M/s Nature Heights Infra Ltd.,having its Branch Office at SCO 18, Dukhniwaran Sahib Road, near Modren Senior Secondary School, Patiala.
…………Opposite Parties Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. QUORUM Sh. Jasjit Singh Bhinder, President Sh.Vinod Kumar Gulati, Member ARGUED BY Sh.Dhiraj Puri,counsel for complainant. OPs ex-parte. ORDER JASJIT SINGH BHINDER,PRESIDENT - This is the complaint filed by Amanpreet Singh (hereinafter referred to as the complainant) against M/s Nature Heights Infra Ltd. and anr.(hereinafter referred to as the OP/s).
- The brief facts of the case are that in the month of May,2012 the authorized agent/representative of the OPs approached the complainant with an offer that the OPs are well known colonizers and deals in the business of construction of flats as well as developer of approved colonies. He further told the complainant that the said company is going to carve out a new residential colony at village Dhanera, Tehsil Anandpur Sahib, District Ropar at cheaper rates and the said colony will be duly got approved from the Govt. and the opposite parties would provide all the world class modern amenities. He further told that in case of advance booking of plot, the complainant has given the offer to sell the plot of 1500 sq.feet in Rs.7,87,500/- for six years installment of Rs.1,31,250/-. Thus under the allurement of the company. The complainant booked the plot Ref.ID No.10033410 vide agreement dated 23.5.2012 and deposited the amount of Rs.5,25,000/- vide receipts No.66913 dated 14.5.2012, receipt No.151409 dated 8.6.2013, receipt No.214639 dated 20.5.2014 and receipt No.256120 dated 3.7.2015.
- It is further averred that thereafter the complainant approached the OPs and requested them to handover the physical possession of the plot as per agreement and even tried to contact on telephone, but the OPs informed the complainant that the company has not yet got the approval of the Govt. Later on, from various news articles published in newspaper , the complainant came to know that the OPs have booked number of plots from all over the Punjab in various schemes floated by the them and none of the person has got the plot . Even the colony has not been approved by the Govt. authorities and also the OPs are not the owner of the alleged property. It is further averred that after coming to know about all the above said facts, complainant immediately approached the OPs and requested them to refund his complete amount alongwith interest as per agreement for sale but the OPs failed to do so . There is thus deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs. Hence this complaint with the prayer to accept the same by giving directions to the OPs to refund the deposited amount of Rs.5,25,000/- alongwith interest @ 16% per annum growth; to pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation on account of unfair trade practice and also to pay Rs.22000/- as litigation expenses.
- Notice of the complaint was duly served upon the OPs but they failed to come present and to contest the complaint.The OPs were accordingly proceeded against ex-parte.
- In evidence, the ld. counsel for the complainant has tendered affidavit of the complainant, Ex.CW/1A alongwith documents Ex.C1 to C5 and closed the evidence.
- We have heard the ld. counsel for the complainant and have also gone through the record of the case, carefully.
- The ld. counsel for the complainant has argued that the complainant booked the plot and deposited the amount of Rs.5,25,2000/ with the OPs but they did not handover the possession of the plot or refunded the deposited amount. Hence the complaint be accepted.
- The averments of the complainant and the evidence lead by him remained unrebutted as the OPs chose not to appear and to contest the case of the complainant.
- The complainant tendered in evidence Ex.CW1/A affidavit of the complainant and he deposed as per his version made in the complaint. Ex.C1 is the copy of agreement, vide which plot was booked .In this agreement, the price of the intended property has been mentioned as Rs.7,87,500/-.It is also mentioned in this agreement that the vendor has received Rs.1,31,250/- as first installment. Further it is also mentioned in the agreement that “if good and marketable title is not made out due to any reason then the purchaser would be at liberty to rescind. The agreement and vendor would be bound to pay 16% P.A.growth to his sum already paid within three months of the rescinding and demands….” Since the OPs have failed to abide by the terms and conditions of the agreement, therefore, they are liable to refund the amount deposited by the complainant.
- In view of our aforesaid discussion, the complaint stands allowed and the OPs are directed to refund the amount of Rs.5,25,000/- alongwith interest @16% per annum and also to pay Rs.5000/- as compensation for causing mental agony and physical harassment to the complainant within a period of 45 days from the date of the receipt of the certified copies of this order.
The complaint could not be decided within statutory period due to heavy pendency of cases. ANNOUNCED DATED:5.11.2020 Vinod Kumar Gulati Jasjit Singh Bhinder Member President | |
