BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM ::
KADAPA Y.S.R DISTRICT
PRESENT SRI V.C. GUNNAIAH, B.Com., M.L., PRESIDENT
SMT. K. SIREESHA, B.L., LADY MEMBER
Thursday, 27th October 2016
CONSUMER COMPLAINT No. 50/ 2016
Gajjala Sudarsana Reddy, S/o G. Suryanarayana Reddy,
Aged about 38 years, Hindu, R/at D.No. 26-1064,
Rameswaram, Proddatur Town and Mandal,
Kadapa – 516 360. ………… Complainant.
Vs.
1. The Managing Director, A.P. Rajiv Swagruha Corporation Ltd.,
7th Floor, Gagan Vihar Apartments, M.J. Road, Nampally,
Hyderabad, Pin – 500 001.
2. The General Manager, A.P. Rajiv Swagruha Corporation Ltd.,
D.No. 6/700-1, Bharath Scouts & Guides, Sankarapuram,
YSR Kadapa, Pin – 516 001. ….. Opposite parties.
This complaint coming for final hearing on 24-10-2016 in the presence of complainant in person and Sri P.V. Ramana Reddy, Advocate for Opposite parties and upon perusing the material papers on record, the Forum made the following:-
O R D E R
(Per V.C. Gunnaiah, President),
1. The complainant filed this complaint under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act 1986 (for short herein after called as C.P. Act) praying this forum to direct the Opposite parties to refund an amount of Rs. 1,43,200/- with interest @ 24% p.a. from 30-11-2013 till payment and also pay Rs. 10,000/- towards compensation for mental agony and Rs. 5,000/- towards costs of the complaint.
2. The averments of the complaint in brevity are that the complainant applied for allotment of house site at Brahma Nilya Town ship at Proddatur project proposed Opposite parties corporation and paid an amount of Rs. 3,000/- towards registration fee and Rs. 70,100/- on 30-11-2013 towards first installment and Rs. 70,100/- on 01-2-2014 towards 2nd installment by way of cheques to the Opposite parties.
3. The Complainant prepared to pay next installment to the O.P.2 but he was informed that some of the erstwhile land owners of the proposed township have approached the Hon’ble High Court and obtained stay orders on 28-2-2014 and the stay could not be vacated, even after laps of 1 year. It is further averred that O.P.2 could not inform about the stage of payment of remaining installments. The Complainant approached O.P.2 for several times for refund of his amount but not refunded and finally requested O.P.2 by way of letter to refund installments amount paid by him though, the Complainant is entitled for return of the same. Hence, this complaint for the above reliefs.
4. Opposite parties 1 & 2 filed common counter admitting that the complainant applied for house site at Bramha Nilayam Township at Proddatur under the scheme proposed by the Opposite parties and paid Rs. 1,40,200/- towards first and second installments and also Rs. 3,000/- towards registration fee but contended that the Complainant is willful defaulter, he did not pay the installments regularly in spite of intimated by the Opposite parties. The Complainant has voluntarily committed default in payment of installments. Therefore, claiming of interest and the application amount is unjust. Thus there is no deficiency of service on the part of the Opposite parties. Hence, the Complainant is not entitled for refund of advance amount of Rs. 1,43,200/- with interest and therefore, the complaint is liable to be dismissed.
5. On the basis of the above pleadings the following points are settled for determination.
- Whether there is deficiency of service on the part of the Opposite parties as claimed by the complainant?
- Whether the complainant is entitled for the reliefs as prayed against the Opposite parties?
- To what relief?
6. No oral evidence reported by the parties. But on behalf of the complainant Exs. A1 to A6 documents are marked. No documents are marked on behalf of the Opposite parties.
7. Heard arguments on both sides and perused the material placed on record by the parties.
8. Point Nos. 1 & 2. There is no dispute between the parties in this case that the complainant is one of the applicant for the house site offered by the Opposite parties at Bramha Nilaya Township, Proddatur and he deposited total amount of Rs. 1,43,200/- in two installments including registration fee of Rs. 3,000/-.
9. It is contended by the complainant that inspite of paid two installments by him the Opposite parties have not allotted the plot nor refunded the amount as they could not allot the plot. He also contended that the Opposite parties refunded amount to some of the customers with interest but refused to refund amount to him. Hence, there is deficiency of service on the part of the Opposite parties. Therefore, he is entitled for refund of amount as claimed and also for mental agony and costs.
10. It is contended by the learned counsel for Opposite parties as the Complainant is defaulter in payment of installments, plot could not be allotted to him and no deficiency of service on the part of the Opposite parties and Complainant is not entitled for refund of amount.
11. After going through the contentions of the parties I see force in the contention of Complainant in this case to hold that the Opposite parties are liable to refund the amount of Rs. 1,40,200/- to the Complainant along with interest. The Opposite parties have refunded the amount to some of the customers who applied for the plots and not allotted but failed to refund the amount of Complainant herein. For example the Opposite parties refunded installments amount paid by them to the applicants with interest in C.S. Nos. 6/2015, 7/2015, 8/2015, 9/2015, 10/2015, 11/2015, 12/2015, and 27/2015 filed in this forum. Opposite parties failed to refund the amount of Complainant which was paid him in two installments at Rs. 70,100/- on 30-11-2013 by way of D.D and Rs. 70,100/- on 01-2-2014 by way of cheque to the Opposite parties. The contention of the Opposite parties for not refunding the amount to the Complainant is that a Writ petition was pending and the Complainant failed to pay the installments. But a perusal of the record shows the said contention that the Complainant not paid installment amounts is not correct. In spite of Writ Petition was pending the Opposite parties refunded the amount to the Complainants in C.C. Nos. 6/2015, 7/2015, 8/2015, 9/2015, 10/2015, 11/2015, 12/2015, and 27/2015 with interest. Therefore, the contention of Opposite parties cannot be countenanced. As seen from Ex. A6 the Complainant requested O.P.2 to refund his amount of Rs. 1,40,200/- with interest but the Opposite parties have not refunded the amount. Therefore, I hold that the Opposite parties failed to allot plot as offered by them in spite of two installments paid by the Complainant nor refunded the amount as requested by him. Therefore, there is deficiency of service on the part of the Opposite parties for not refunding the amount to the Complainant. Hence, the Complainant is entitled Rs. 1,40,200/- with interest at 12% p.a. from the date of payment till realization and also Rs. 3,000/- towards mental agony and Rs. 1,000/- towards costs. However, the complainant is not entitled for refund of registration fee and application fee which are non-refundable. Accordingly, points 1 & 2 are answered in favour of the complainant.
12. Point No. 3. In the result, the complaint is allowed, directing the Opposite parties to refund Rs. 1,40,200/- (Rupees one lakh forty thousand and two hundred only) i.e. Rs. 70,100/- with interest @ 12% p.a. from 30-11-2013 and Rs. 70,100/- with interest @ 12% p.a. from 01-2-2014 i.e. date of deposits by the Complainant till realization and shall also pay Rs. 3,000/- (Rupees three thousand only) towards mental agony and Rs. 1,000/- (Rupees one thousand only) towards costs of the complaint to the complainant. The Opposite parties shall pay the above amount within 45 days from the date of receipt of this order.
Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by him, corrected and pronounced by us in the open forum, this the 27th October 2016
MEMBER PRESIDENT
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
Witnesses examined.
For Complainant: NIL For Respondent : NIL
Exhibits marked for Complainant : -
Ex. A1 P/c of receipt from O.P.2 to Complainant dt. 30-11-2013 for Rs. 70,100/-.
Ex. A2 P/c of receipt from O.P.2 to Complainant dt. 3-2-2014 for Rs. 70,100/-.
Ex. A3 P/c of esava receipt issued in favour of Complainant for Rs. 250/- towards
application fee.
Ex. A4 P/c of D.D No. 074781, dt. 30-11-2013 for Rs. 70,100/- towards
1st installment.
Ex. A5 P/c of RSCL information system issued in favour of Complainant dt.30-11-13 .
Ex. A6 P/c of letter, dt. 10-12-0214 from Complainant to the G.M.A.P.R.S.C.L.,
Kadapa.
Exhibits marked on behalf of the Opposite parties : - NIL
MEMBER PRESIDENT
Copy to :-
1) Gajjala Sudarsana Reddy, S/o G. Suryanarayana Reddy,
R/at D.No. 26-1064, Rameswaram, Proddatur Town and Mandal,
Kadapa – 516 360
2) Sri P.V. Ramana Reddy, Advocate for Opposite parties.
B.V.P
