Haryana

StateCommission

CC/329/2018

DAVINDER SINGH - Complainant(s)

Versus

UNIVERSAL BUILDWELL PVT.LTD. - Opp.Party(s)

MUNISH GOEL

06 Feb 2023

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

HARYANA PANCHKULA

                  

  Date of Instituion:22.05.2018

                Date of final hearing:06.02.2023

                                                 Date of pronouncement:06.02.2023

 

Consumer Complaint No.329 of 2018

 

IN THE MATTER OF

 

Davinder Singh s/o Sh. Roshan Lal R/o Rana Niwas, VPO Sidhwari,  (Balla), Tehsil Dharamshala, District Kangra, Himachal Pradesh.

 

                                                                                      .….Complainant

 

Through counsel Mr. Munish Goel, Advocate

 

Versus

 

 

1.      Universal Buildwell Private Ltd. 1102, Antriksh Bhawan 22 Kasturba Gandhi Marg, New Delhi, 110001 through its Managing Director, Director/Partner/Authorized Signatory.

2.      Universal Buildwell Private ltd. 8^th floor, Universal Trade Tower, Sector 49, Gurgaon, Sohna Road, Gurgaon, through its Managing Director, Director/Partner/Authorized Signatory.

3.      Raman Puri Director of Universal Buildwell Private Ltd. 8^th  Floor, Universal Trade Tower, Sector 49, Gurgaon, Sohna Road, Gurgaon.

4.      Varun Puri Director of Universal Buildwell Private Ltd. 8^th  Floor, Universal Trade Tower, Sector 49, Gurgaon, Sohna Road, Gurgaon.

5.      Vikram Puri Director of Universal Buildwell Private Ltd. 8^th  Floor, Universal Trade Tower, Sector 49, Gurgaon, Sohna Road, Gurgaon.

6.      Mehar Ram Director of Universal Buildwell Private Ltd. 8^th  Floor, Universal Trade Tower, Sector 49, Gurgaon, Sohna Road, Gurgaon.

7.    Amit Kumar Singh Director of Universal Buildwell Private Ltd. 8^th  Floor, Universal Trade Tower, Sector 49, Gurgaon, Sohna Road, Gurgaon.

….Opposite parties

 

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

                   Mrs. Manjula, Member.

 

Present:-    Mr. Munish Goel, Advocate for the complainant.

Opposite parties were proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated 03.04.2019.

 

O R D E R

Per Manjula, Member:

 

                    Brief facts giving rise for the disposal of the present complaint are that the complainant booked a residential apartment with the opposite parties (OPs) and deposited Rs.2,75,000/- as booking amount with the OPs. The OPs allotted an apartment bearing No.1203 on 12^th floor C-2 Tower, Sector-85, Faridabad, having area 1536 sq. ft. together with one covered parking space against the basic sale price of Rs.30,02,880/- to the complainant.  Apartment Buyer’s Agreement was also executed between the complainant and the OPs on 15.02.2012. The complainant had paid total amount of Rs.25,52,074/- to the Ops on different dates. It is also alleged that at the time of allotment, OPs assured the complainant that possession of the flat would be delivered within 42 months from the date of approval of building plans after completion of all the basic amenities. It is also submitted that Ops told the complainant that their building of the project was approved on 25.07.2011. Accordingly, the Ops were required to give the physical possession of the apartment to the complainant after expiry of 42 months i.e. upto 24.01.2015. It is further submitted that as per clause 13.3 of the agreement, the Ops would be entitled to another 300 days of grace period to allow for unforeseen delay in obtaining the occupation certificate. Thus, after the addition of 300 days from 24.01.2015, the Ops would be liable to give the physical possession of the apartment by 20.11.2015. It is also submitted that the Ops would be liable to pay compensation @ Rs.5/- per sq. ft. of the super area per month for delay period. It is also alleged that the complainant checked the website of Ops and found that the License of Ops had expired in 2014.  It is further submitted that when the complainant visited the site, he found that a number of works were pending at that time.  The complainant made several requests to the Ops for delivery of possession of the apartment but the Ops did not consider his genuine request. Thus, there was deficiency in service on the part of the Ops. The complainant prayed that the Ops be directed to refund Rs.25,52,074/- which was deposited by him alongwith interest @ 18% p.a. from the date of deposits, to pay Rs.5,00,000/- as compensation for mental agony and harassment and Rs.55,000/- as litigation expenses, and other reliefs as prayed for.

2.                Notice of the complaint was issued against the Ops, but despite service through publication, Ops failed to appear before this Commission and thus ex-parte proceedings were initiated against the Ops vide order dated 03.04.2019

3.                When the complaint was posted for recording evidence of the complainant, counsel for complainant has tendered into evidence affidavit of Davinder Singh-complainant as Ex.CW1/A vide which he has reiterated all the averments made in the complaint alongwith documents Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-15 and closed the same.

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

5.                As per the basic averments made in the complaint including the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the complainant, the foremost question which requires adjudication by this Commission is as to whether the present complainant is entitled to get refund of the amount which he had already paid to the Ops, alongwith interest or not? 

6.                After careful perusal of the entire record, which is not rebutted, it stands proved that the complainant booked a residential apartment with Ops by paying Rs.2,75,000/- as booking amount. An agreement dated 15.02.2012 also came into existence between the parties. As per the said agreement, total cost of the apartment was agreed to be Rs.30,02,880/-. As per the complainant, despite payment of an amount of Rs.25,52,074/- (Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-2 & Ex.C-4 to Ex.C-9.) to the Ops,  the construction was not completed by the Ops. Complainant requested for refund of deposited amount (letter Ex.C-13). Since the project is not complete and possession is delayed much beyond the stipulated time, this Commission is of the considered view that there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party and thus, the complainant is well within his legal rights to get the refund of balance amount of Rs.25,52,074/- (Twenty five lakhs fifty two thousand and seventy four only) which he had already deposited with the Ops. Even otherwise also, there is a strong element of the physical and mental agony caused to the complainant for investing a huge amount and still remained deprived of the possession of the apartment and under these constrained circumstances, he had to knock the door of this Commission even for seeking refund of the amount.

7.                In the light of the above observation and discussion, there are sufficient grounds to accept the complaint and while accepting the complaint, the Ops are directed to refund the amount of Rs.25,52,074/- (Twenty five lakhs fifty two thousand and seventy four only) alongwith interest @ 12%  per annum from  the date of respective deposits till its realization. In case, there is a breach or delay in making payment within the stipulated period of 45 days, in that eventuality, the complainant would further be entitled to get the interest @ 15% per annum, for the defaulting period. The complainant is also entitled to Rs.1,00,000/- (One Lakh only) as compensation for  mental agony and physical harassment.  In addition, the complainant is also entitled to 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. 

8.                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.

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

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

 

Pronounced on:06^th February, 2023

                                                                            

                                                                                               

                                                                                      T.P.S. Mann

                                                                                      (President)        

 

 

 Manjula

(Member) 

 

                                                                                                           

 

                                                                                                           

M.S.