Karnataka

Bangalore 4th Additional

CC/15/1019

Sri. Manjunath S.C. - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Manager M/s. Maxworth Realty India Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

Smt. Vidya Jahagirdar

07 Dec 2017

ORDER

Complaint filed on: 30.05.2015

                                                      Disposed on: 07.12.2017

 

BEFORE THE IV ADDL DISTRICT

CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BENGALURU

 1^ST FLOOR, BMTC, B-BLOCK, TTMC BUILDING, K.H.ROAD, SHANTHINAGAR, BENGALURU – 560 027       

 

 

CC.No.1019/2015

DATED THIS THE 07^th DECEMBER OF 2017

 

PRESENT

 

 

SRI.S.L.PATIL, PRESIDENT

SRI.D.SURESH, MEMBER

SMT.N.R.ROOPA, MEMBER

 

Complainant/s: -                           

Sri.Manjunath.S.C

S/o Sri.Chandrappa.K.T,

Major

R/at no.593,

Anjaneya temple road,

Shivani Tarikere Taluk, Chikkamagaluru,

Shivani-577549.

 

Presently R/at

C/o Srinivas Reddy,

no.567, 1^st floor, 5^th cross, Behind Syndicate bank,

Konena Agrahara,

Bengaluru-17.

 

By Adv.Smt.Vidya Jahagirdar       

 

V/s

Opposite party/s

Respondent/s:-

 

The Manager,

M/s.Maxworth Realty India ltd., KMP house, 12/2,

Yamuna Bai road,

Madhavnagar,

Bengaluru-01.

 

By Adv.Sri.Hanumantharayappa   

 

 

ORDER DELIVERED BY PRESIDENT

SRI.S.L.PATIL

 

 

This complaint is filed by the Complainant seeking the relief of directing the Opposite party (herein after referred as Op) to return an amount of Rs.1 lakh (Rs.One lakh) along with interest of 18% from 07.10.2012 to till the date of realization, so also the compensation.   

 

          2. The brief facts of the case of the Complainant are that the Op formed a layout in Dyavarahalli village, Kundana Hobli, Devanahalli Taluk, Bengaluru Rural district (herein after referred as said project). In this context, the Complainant contacted the Op to purchase 2 sites. Accordingly Op agreed for it. According to the Complainant he has paid an initial amount of Rs.1 lakh in respect of 2 sites bearing plot no.203 & 204, for an amount of Rs.13,44,000/- each which is specifically stated in para 3 & 4 of the complaint. On receipt of the said amount, the Op has issued the receipt with certain terms & conditions available in the booking form which is marked as doc.no.1. As per the terms & conditions, the Op did not commence the work i.e. did not take any developmental work on account of reasons known to him. Hence the Complainant has insisted the Op to refund the advance amount. In this context, on 27.10.2012, the Op has given a letter of undertaking, saying that with 4 months, they are going to register the site in the same project, but it was not done. Thereafter the Complainant on 05.11.2014 sent a letter through registered post asking for return of an amount of Rs.1 lakh along with compensation of Rs.30,000/-.  This letter has been received by Op, but did not answer. The said letter marked as doc.no.4 & 5. It is also the case of the Complainant that after waiting for a long time on seeing the attitude of the Op, he sent legal notice dtd.10.04.2015 which was sent on 15.04.2015, asking for return of Rs.1 lakh with interest at the rate of 18% from the date of payment till the date of realization within 15 days. The said copy of notice is marked as doc.no.6 & 7. But no response by the Op, hence the Complainant has no other go except to file this instant complaint as against the Op for seeking relief as sought in the complaint.

 

          3. Notice was ordered to issue to the Op. In response, Op did appear through his counsel and filed the version admitting in respect of booking 2 plots by the Complainant on payment of initial amount of Rs.1 lakh. But the say of Op is that there is no any deficiency of service on its part. Hence, the Complainant is entitled only for refund of amount as per the terms & conditions described in booking form which is marked as doc.no.1.  Wherein, it is stated that sale agreement will be executed only on 30% payment of the total sale consideration and the cancellation without valid reason 15% of booking amount will be deducted towards service and transport charges. It is also stated by Op that the project is going to delay as stated in para 8 & 9 of its version. Hence, prays for dismissal of the complaint.

 

          4. The Complainant to substantiate his case filed his affidavit evidence and got marked the documents from doc.no.1 to 7. Sri.Rupesh Sulegai, DGM of Op company filed his affidavit evidence and none of the documents got marked. Both filed written arguments. Heard both side.

 

5. The points that arise for our consideration are:

1. Whether is there any deficiency of service on the part of Op, if so whether the Complainant is entitled for the relief sought for ?
2. What order ?

                  

           

 

6.  Our answers to the above points are as under:

 

Point no.1: In the Affirmative.

Point no.2: As per the final order for the following

 

REASONS

 

          7. Point no.1: The undisputed facts which reveals from the pleadings of the parties go to show that the Complainant booked 2 plots on initial payment of Rs.1 lakh which has been described in para 3 & 4 of the complaint is not disputed by the Op. It is also not in dispute that the issuance of the notice with regard to the cancellation of the site and refund of money. Inspite of the notice served on the Op, Op did not respond to it. It is also not in dispute that Op in para 8 & 9 of its version stated that the project is going to delay because of the bonafide reasons and not intentional. It is also not in dispute that, the Op is ready to refund booking amount paid by the Complainant. Now the only question that crops up for our consideration is, whether the Op is at liberty to deduct the advance amount paid by the Complainant by invoking the general terms & conditions as shown in doc.no.1.  If one of the condition with regard to cancellation without a valid reason 15% of booking amount will be deducted towards service and transport charges. In our view, we do not find any laxity on the part of the Complainant to perform his obligations in respect of purchasing the said sites, but it is the Op who has delayed the commencement of the said project which fact has been specifically admitted by him. So the above said terms & conditions with regard to the cancellation is for the valid reasons by the Complainant, under such circumstances, the question of deduction of 15% of booking amount cannot arise. We have also noticed that the Op has taken the undertaking for refund of money. In view of the deficiency of service on the part of Op, we are of the opinion that the entire amount of Rs.1 lakh paid by the Complainant is to be refundable. With regard to the compensation is concerned, we proposed to compensate it by awarding interest at the rate of 6% p.a. Accordingly, we answered the point no.1 in the affirmative.

 

8. Point no.2: In view of findings on point no.1, directing the Op to return an amount of Rs.1 lakh and with regard to the compensation, we proposed to compensate it by awarding interest at 6% p.a. to the Complainant from the date of filing of the complaint till its realization and the cost of litigation is Rs.2,000/-. Accordingly we passed the following.

 

ORDER

 

          The complaint filed by the Complainant is hereby allowed.

 

          2. The Op is hereby directed to pay an amount of Rs.One lakh to the Complainant with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of filing the complaint till the date of realization and also directed to pay the cost of litigation of Rs.2,000/-.

 

3. We also directed the Op to release the said amount within six weeks from the date of this order, failing which the Complainant is at liberty to have the redress as per law.

 

           

          Supply free copy of this order to both the parties.

 

          (Dictated to the Stenographer, got it transcribed, typed by her/him and corrected by me, then pronounced in the Open Forum on 7^th December of 2017).

 

(SURESH.D)   MEMBER

(ROOPA.N.R)     MEMBER

(S.L.PATIL)  PRESIDENT

                                                                        

1. Witness examined on behalf of the complainant/s by way of affidavit:

 

Sri.Manjunath.S.C, who being the complainant was examined. 

 

Copies of Documents produced on behalf of Complainant/s:

 

Doc.no.1	Booking form dtd.29.09.12
Doc.no.2	Receipt dtd.29.09.12
Doc.no.3	Letter dtd.27.10.12 from Op
Doc.no.4	Letter dtd.05.11.14 from Complainant
Doc.no.5	Original postal acknowledgement
Doc.no.6	Legal notice dtd.10.04.15
Doc.no.7	Original postal receipt

 

2. Witness examined on behalf of the Opposite party/s Respondent/s by way of affidavit:

 

Sri.Roopesh Sulegai, who being the Deputy General Manager in Op Company was examined. 

 

Copies of Documents produced on behalf of Opposite party/s

 

-NIL-

 

 

(SURESH.D)   MEMBER

(ROOPA.N.R)     MEMBER

(S.L.PATIL)  PRESIDENT