National Consumer Disputes Redressal
Pooja Contructions Limited vs Subhash Patel & Anr. on 1 December, 2015
NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION NEW DELHI REVISION PETITION NO. 1569 OF 2015 (Against the Order dated 21/05/2015 in Appeal No. 664/2014 of the State Commission Rajasthan) 1. POOJA CONTRUCTIONS LIMITED C-24 BHAGWAN DAS ROAD, C SCHEME, THROGH DIRECTOR GIRISH CHANDRA, AGGARWAL, JAIPUR RAJASTHAN ...........Petitioner(s) Versus 1. SUBHASH PATEL & ANR. S/O SHRI S.N PATEL , R/O 209 LOWER MORTLAKE ROAD, RICHMOND, SURREY TW - 928, 2. SMT KALPANA PATEL, W/O SHRI SUBHASH PATEL, R/O 209, LOWER MOTHERLAND ROAD, RICHMOND SURREY TQ - 928 ...........Respondent(s)
BEFORE: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.M. MALIK, PRESIDING MEMBER HON'BLE DR. S.M. KANTIKAR, MEMBER For the Petitioner : Ms. Archana Pathak Dave, Advocate For the Respondent : Mr. Parasmal Jain, Advocate Dated : 01 Dec 2015 ORDER JUSTICE J. M. MALIK, PRESIDING MEMBER
1. Shri Subhash Patel and Smt. Kamla Patel, the complainants, booked a flat with Puja Constructions Limited/OP. They made the initial payment in the sum of Rs.4,83,560/-. The payment schedule is reproduced as follows:
Sr. No. Activity % of payment 1 On Booking 10 % 2 Within 30 days 10 % 3 Within 3 months from the date of booking 10 % 4 Within 6 months from the date of booking 10 % 5 Within 9 months from the date of booking 10 % 6 Within 12 months from the date of booking 10 % 7 Within 15 months from the date of booking 10 % 8 Within 18 months from the date of booking 10 % 9 Within 21 months from the date of booking 10 % 10 Within 24 months from the date of booking 5 % 11 Within 25 months from the date of booking (on Possession) 5 % Its clauses 8, 11, 12 and 13 are also reproduced as under:
"8. Cancellation of the booking is not allowed before 6 months from the date of booking. After six months refund can be made after deducting 5 % ( as cancellation charges) of the total amount credited with the company.
11. In the event the residential flat is allotted after six months from the date of booking, simple interest @ 12% per annum shall be paid for the period delayed beyond six months on the amount credited in the company as advance till such time.
12. In case the company fails to allot a flat within a period of one year from the date of making the payment, then the buyer would have the option to withdraw the money by giving one-month notice
13. Possession of the flat will be handed over to the buyer on complete development of the property only after full and final payment of all money payable by the buyer to the company. The sale deed shall be executed and registered in favour of the BUYER within reasonable time of giving the possession."
2. This is indisputable fact that the petitioner paid initial payment and 10 % further, total being Rs.9,77,024/-. The construction of the flat did not make any headway. The first installment was paid on 26.2.2008. The second installment was paid as per the schedule mentioned above. It transpired that upto 13.2.2009, only the structure of the first floor of that building was being constructed. It was assumed that it will take years to complete that building according to the map.
3. Legal notice was sent to the petitioner on 4.2.2010 where the complainants' demanded refund of the amount deposited by them towards the cost of the flat. The complaint was filed before the State Commission on 25.3.2010 i.e. after expiry of 25 months. The OP filed the reply on 14.7.2010. In para 5 of the reply, the petitioner admitted that the construction of the flat is continuing as per Rules. The building was not complete till July, 2010.
4. Both the fora below allowed the complaint and directed the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.9,77,024/- to the complainant alongwith interest @ 12%. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that amount be awarded @ 9% per annum. The fora below did not agree to his request.
5. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently argued that as per the law laid down by the Supreme Court in various authorities, the interest should be reduced to 9% only. She submitted that the complainant failed to pay the remaining installment and, therefore, the construction could not be completed in time.
7. We find no force in the arguments of learned counsel for the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner could not state on which date the flats were complete. The photographs of the flats were filed by the complainants before us in the year 2015. It also shows that only one block is complete. Other blocks are still not ready. Photograph dated 2.10.2015 reveals that the construction in other blocks is still going on. It is well known that the consumers are exasperated by senseless delay. The OP has made an attempt to feather its own nest i.e to make profit for oneself often at the expense of others.
8. The OPs have enjoyed the amount of the complainant for about 8 years. The Apex court in the case of K. A. Nagamani vs. Housing Commissionner, Karnataka Housing Board, Civil Appeals No. 6730-31 decided on 19.9.2012, has granted 18% interest plus compensation. The fora below nowhere missed the wood for the trees. We add our voice to the orders passed by the fora below and dismiss the revision petition with costs of Rs.10,000/- under Section 26 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The said costs be paid to the petitioner within 45 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order otherwise it will carry interest @ 9% per annum till its recovery. The orders passed by fora below are hereby confirmed.
......................J J.M. MALIK PRESIDING MEMBER ...................... DR. S.M. KANTIKAR MEMBER