Haryana

StateCommission

CC/341/2017

VIKAS SANDUJA - Complainant(s)

Versus

ORRIS INFRASTRUCTURE PVT.LTD. - Opp.Party(s)

R.S.SIHAG

13 Feb 2023

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

HARYANA PANCHKULA

                  

  Date of Instituion:30.05.2017

                Date of final hearing:13.02.2023

                                                 Date of pronouncement:13.02.2023

 

Consumer Complaint No.341 of 2017

 

IN THE MATTER OF

 

1.      Vikas Sanduja son of S.M. Sanduja

2.      Priya Sanduja wife of Vikas Sanduja

          Both residents of House No.1596, Sector-16, Faridabad.

 

                                                                                      .….Complainants

Through counsel Mr. R.S. Sihag, Advocate

Versus

 

ORS Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., Corporate Office at UGF-33, Parsvnath City Mall, Sector-12, Faridabad, through its Managing Director.

 

….Opposite party

 

CORAM:   Hon’ble Mr. Justice T.P.S. Mann, President.

                   Mrs. Manjula, Member.

 

Present:-    Mr. R.S. Sihag, Advocate for the complainant.

None for the opposite party.

 

 

O R D E R

Per Manjula, Member:

 

                    Brief facts giving rise for disposal of the present complaint are that the complainants applied for a residential unit with the opposite party alongwith booking amount of Rs.3,90,000/-.  The opposite party allotted flat No.302, Tower No.A-2 on 3^rd floor of the Group Housing complex having area of 1500 sq. ft. in Royal Residency, Sector-89, Faridabad, to the complainants. Flat Buyer’s Agreement was also executed between the complainants and the opposite party on 27.01.2009 as Ex.C-3. The complainants paid total amount of Rs.24,74,720/- to the opposite party against total sale consideration of Rs.27,75,000/-. It is also alleged that at the time of allotment, the opposite party had assured the complainants that the said flat will have all the facilities like sewerage, link road, water supply, electricity as well as other basic amenities. As per the agreement, the possession of the flat was to be handed over to the complainants within a period of 36 months from the date of agreement. But despite payment of Rs. 24,74,720/-, the opposite party failed to deliver the possession of the flat in question to the complainants. The complainants sent a legal notice on 23.04.2017 to the opposite party seeking refund of the amount paid by them but they did not receive any response from OP. Complainants made several requests to the opposite party either to give the possession or to refund their hard earned money but the OP did not consider their genuine request. Thus, there was deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. The complainants prayed that the OP be directed to refund Rs. 24,74,720/-  which was deposited by them alongwith interest @ 18% p.a. from the date of  deposits; to pay Rs.2,50,000/- as compensation for mental agony and harassment; and Rs.50,000/- as litigation expenses.

2.                Notice was issued to the opposite party and the written statement was filed, wherein the OP admitted that the complainants had applied for a residential flat in its project and flat No.302, Tower No.A-2 on 3^rd floor of the Group Hosing complex having area of 1500 sq. ft. in Royal Residency, Sector-89, Faridabad was allotted to them. It is also admitted that agreement in this regard was executed on 27.01.2009 between the parties. It is denied that the payment was made by the complainants despite there being no substantial construction on the site. It is submitted that the license had not been renewed by the Government agency. However, due to non-renewal of license, the opposite party was not in a position to complete the work and to hand over the possession of the flat to the complainant. It is denied that the complainant ever served legal notice dated 23.04.2017 to the opposite party. Other allegations made in the complaint are denied. Thus there was no deficiency in service on the part of the OP.

3.                When the complaint was posted for recording evidence of the complainants, counsel for the complainants tendered into evidence affidavit Ex.CW1/A of complainant-Vikas Sanduja, vide which he has reiterated all the averments taken in the complaint alongwith documents Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-8 and closed the same.

4.                On the other hand, evidence of opposite party is closed by court vide its order dated 09.12.2022 on account of opposite party not recording its evidence despite availing six opportunities.

5.                The arguments have been advanced by Mr. R.S. Sihag, learned counsel for the complainant. With his kind assistance entire record including documentary evidence as well as whatever evidence had been led during the proceedings of the complaint has also been properly perused and examined.

6.                As per the basic averment  made in the complaint including the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the complainants, the foremost question which requires adjudication by this Commission is as to whether the present complainants are entitled to get refund of the amount which they had already paid to OP, alongwith the interest or not? 

7.                Undisputedly, the complainants had applied for a residential flat in the project of opposite party who had allotted flat No.302, Tower No.A-2 on 3^rd floor of the Group Hosing complex having area of 1500 sq. ft. in Royal Residency, Sector-89, Faridabad to them through allotment letter. The complainants paid an amount of Rs.24,74,720/- to the opposite party (Ex.C-5 colly) . It is also undisputed that the Flat Buyer Agreement was executed between the complainants and Ops on 27.01.2009(Ex.C-3), according to which possession of the said flat was to be handed over to the complainants within a period of 36 months from the date of agreement. It is also not disputed that construction work was not completed and opposite party failed to deliver the possession of the flat in question despite the fact that the complainants kept waiting for several years. Since, the opposite party did not complete the construction work till date, there was no possibility of delivery of possession of the flat within the stipulated period, therefore, the complainants are justified in seeking refund of their deposited amount. In view of the above, it is held that the opposite party is liable to refund the amount deposited by the complainants alongwith interest and compensation. As such, the question is answered in the affirmative.

8.                In the light of the above observation and discussion, there are sufficient grounds to accept the complaint and while accepting the complaint, the opposite party is directed to refund the amount of Rs. 24,74,720/- (Rs. Twenty four lacs seventy four thousand and seven hundred twenty only) to the complainant alongwith interest @ 12%  per annum from  the date of respective deposits till realization.  In case, there is delay in making payment within the stipulated period of 45 days, in that eventuality, the complainant would be further entitled to get interest @ 15% per annum, for the defaulting period. The complainant is also entitled to Rs.1,50,000/- (One lakh fifty thousand Only) as compensation for mental agony and physical harassment.  In addition, the complainant is also entitled to receive Rs.44,000/- (Forty four thousand Only) as litigation expenses. It is also made clear that for non-compliance, the provisions enshrined under section 72 of the C.P.Act would also be attracted.

9.                A copy of this order be provided to all the parties free of cost as mandated by the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. This order be uploaded forthwith on the website of the Commission for the perusal of the parties.

10.              Application(s), pending, if any, stand(s) disposed off in terms of the aforesaid order.

11.              File be consigned to record room alongwith a copy of this order.

 

Pronounced on:13 ^th February, 2023

 

                                                                                               

                                                                                                           

                                                                                                            T.P.S. Mann

                                                                                                            (President)

           

 

 

 Manjula

(Member)     

M.S.