Date of Filing:13/04/2017
Date of Order:10/04/2018
BEFORE THE BANGALORE I ADDITIONAL DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM SHANTHINAGAR BANGALORE - 27.
Dated: 10TH DAY OF APRIL 2018
PRESENT
SRI.H.R. SRINIVAS, B.Sc., LL.B. PRESIDENT
SRI D.SURESH, B.Com., LL.B., MEMBER
COMPLAINT NO.663/2017
COMPLAINANT/S | | |
| 1 | Smt.Mamatha B.E., W/o Basavaraj S.N., Aged about 49 years, R/o “Om Ganesh Nilaya”, S.R. Layout, 3rd Cross, Opp. Yamaha Show Room, Turuvanuru Road, Chitradurga City -577 501 Chitradurga Distrit. (Sri ANN Adv. for complainant) |
V/s
OPPOSITE PARTY/IES | | |
| 1 | M/s Transcity Developer, By its Managing Partner, Dr.V. Nandagopal, S/o S.Venugopal, Aged about 40 years, No.32, 2nd Floor, 13th Cross, (Above Hotel Shanthi Sagar), Sadashivanagar, Bangalore 560 080. (O.P: Exparte) |
ORDER
BY SRI.H.R. SRINIVAS, PRESIDENT
1. This is the complaint filed under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the Opposite Party (hereinafter referred to as O.P) alleging deficiency in service and to direct the O.P to pay a sum of Rs.2,09,580/- along with interest at 24% per annum from the date of sale agreement dated 17.8.2014 till realization to the complainant and also to direct the O.P to pay Rs.1,00,000/- towards compensation for financial hardship and mental agony and to award costs of this complaint and other reliefs as deems fit under the circumstances.
2. The brief facts of the complainant’s case is that, O.P executed an agreement of sale dated 17.8.2014 and agreed to sell the property bearing plot No.685, measuring 30 X 40 feet totally measuring 1200 Sq. feet formed in the layout called as “TRANS PRAKRUTHI” situated at Malmachanahalli Village, Jangamkotee Hobli, Siddlagatta Taluk, Chikkaballapur District. The total sale consideration was fixed at Rs.5,98,000/-. That the complainant paid an advance amount of Rs.2,09,580/- as per the agreement of sell. That the remaining balance of sale consideration of Rs.3,89,220/- to be paid within one month from the date of obtaining approval from the District Town and Country Planning (DTCP) authority. In terms of the agreement of sale it was agreed by the O.P that if he fails to get the approval from the DTCP he would refund the sale considered received by him along with interest as per the existing bank rate of interest. He came to know that the O.P had no property at all to develop and form layout and in order cheat the complainant and other persons and to have wrongful gain and to cause wrongful loss has made false assurances and obtained the advance sale consideration, he has not at all got the approval from DTCP and not at all took any steps in formation of the layout and the site. Hence he had to issue notice on 17.1.2017 through his counsel demanding the O.P either to register the plot/site in his favour or to return the money with interest, which O.P failed to do. Hence this complaint.
3. After issuance of notice to O.P, O.P did not appear before this Forum. Hence O.P placed exparte.
4. In order to prove the case, the complainant filed his affidavit evidence along with the copies of the documents. Heard the counsel for the complainant.
5. On the basis of the above pleadings and evidence of the complainant, the following points arise for our consideration:-
1) Whether the complainant has proved
deficiency in service on the part of the
Opposite Party?
2) Whether the complainant is entitled to
the relief prayed for in the complaint?
3) What order?
6. Our answers to the above points are:-
POINT 1): Affirmative.
POINT 2): Partly affirmative.
POINT 3): As per the final order
for the following:
REASONS
ON POINT No.1:-
7. The complainant has filed affidavit evidence mainly reiterating the facts as stated in the complaint. The same has not been controverted or objected to by the O.P.
8. On perusal of the complaint, the oral evidence and the documents produced by the complainant i.e. the Sale agreement, Receipt for having received the Rs.2,09,580/-, it becomes clear that the O.P has entered into an Agreement of Sale and to receive the balance of Rs.3,89,220/- after he obtain the approval from the District Town Country Planning. The legal notice issued by the complainant clearly demands to register the Sale Deed in respect of the site after sending the documents pertaining to the approval from the Town Planning authority or else to repay the same at 2% per month.
9. If at all O.P has formed the layout , formed the sites and got it register in favour of the complainant or had he repaid the amount received by him as part consideration he would have appeared before the Forum and would have filed their version denying the contents of the complaint and putting forth their version. Inspite of issuing notice through RPAD which has been returned unserved. In view of this there is a clear deficiency in service on the part of the O.P towards the complainant. Hence Point No.1 is answered in the affirmative.
ON POINT No.2:-
10. The claim of the complainant has already been stated in the early para of this order. In view of the deficiency in service by the O.P towards the complainant and having received the full payment of Rs.2,09,580/- from the complainant and having not formed the plot/site in question and not handing over the same well in time as per the agreement or even thereafter, O.P is bound to repay the same along with interest. We are of the opinion that if 12% interest is ordered to be paid on the above amount, ends of justice will be met.
11. In view of the complainant proving the deficiency in service and that O.P failing to complete the formation of site and handing over the same to the complainant, the complainant is made to suffer mental agony, loss of peace and hence he had to approach this Forum seeking redressal and exercising his rights under the Consumer Protection Act.
12. The O.p has made the complainant to come to this Forum by engaging an advocate for which he has to spend money. In view of this, we are of the opinion that if a sum of Rs.25,000/- is ordered to be paid by O.p to the complainant towards legal expenses and litigation expenses we feel that the ends of the justice will be met.
13. The act of the O.P in not forming the site registering the same in favour of the complainant has put the complainant in a much disadvantages position and has made him suffer mentally no amount of compensation can compensate the metal harassment suffered by the complainant. In view of this, damages for mental harassment has to be ordered to be paid by the O.P to the complainant. We quantify the damages for mental harassment at Rs.25,000/-. The complainant has sought for damages of Rs.1,00,000/- towards compensation for mental stress agony, physical strain and monetary loss. The same has not been substantiated by supporting document and evidence. Hence we answer Point No:2 in the affirmative.
ON POINT No. 3:-
14. On the basis of the findings given on Point No.1 and 2 as above, we proceed to pass the following:-
ORDER
1. The complaint is partly allowed with cost.
2. The OP i.e. M/s Transcity Developer, Represented by its Managing Partner, Dr.V.Nandagopal is hereby directed to pay a sum of Rs.2,09,580/-along with interest at the rate of 12% per annum on the above sum from the date of sale agreement dated 17.8.2014 till payment of full amount the complainant.
3. Further O.P is also directed to pay Rs.25,000/- towards cost of the litigation expenses and Rs.25,000/- towards mental harassment to the complainant.
4. The O.P is hereby directed to comply the above order within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order and submit the compliance report to this forum within 15 days thereafter.
5. Send a copy of this order to both parties free of cost.
(Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed and computerized by him, corrected and then pronounced by us in the Open Forum on this the 10th Day of April 2018)
MEMBER PRESIDENT
*Rak
ANNEXURES
1. Witness examined on behalf of the Complainant/s by way of affidavit:
Smt. Mamatha.B.E. – Complainant.
Copies of Documents produced on behalf of Complainant/s:
Doc.No.1: The copy of the sale agreement dated:17/08/2014
Doc.No.2: The copies of the receipts(3 in Nos)
Doc.No.3: The copy of the legal notice dated:17/01/2017
Doc.No.4: The copy of the postal acknowledgment.
2. Witness examined on behalf of the Opposite party/s by way of affidavit:
RW-1 : Nil
Copies of Documents produced on behalf of Opposite Party/s
- Nil-
MEMBER PRESIDENT
