Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Delhi District Court

Sh. Vijay Pal Yadav vs M/S Adel Landmarks Ltd on 22 December, 2018

                      IN THE COURT OF SHRI SANJAY SHARMA­I
                     ADDL. DISTRICT JUDGE - 02 (EAST DISTRICT)
                          KARKARDOOMA COURTS : DELHI

CS No. 860/17

Sh. Vijay Pal Yadav,
S/o Late Shri Nihal Singh Yadav,
R/o 645, Sector 23,
Gurgaon Haryana­122017                                                              ............ Plaintiff

                                                                                Versus
M/s ADEL Landmarks Ltd.,
Formerly M/s Era Landmarks Ltd.,
Through its Director.

Head Office at:­
B­24, Sector­3, Noida­201301.

Registered Office at:­
B­ 292, Chandrakanta Complex,
Shop No. 8, Near Metro Pillar No. 161,
New Ashok Nagar, Delhi­110096.

Office at:­
C­56/41, Sector 62,
Noida­201303, UP                                                                      ........Defendant

              Date of institution                                                                  :  15.12.2017
              Date of  reserving  judgment                                                         :  11.12.2018
              Date of judgment                                                                     :  22.12.2018

J U D G M E N T :
              The plaintiff filed the present suit against the defendant under the
provisions of Order 37 CPC for recovery of an amount of Rs. 46,14,878/­

CS No. 860/17                                                                                                                Page 1 of  6
 along with interest @ 10% p.a., which has been treated as an ordinary suit
for recovery  with the consent and upon the statement of the Ld. Counsel for
the plaintiff. 
2.                          In brief, the facts as averred in the plaint are that the defendant
company was originally registered by the name of   M/s Era Land marks
Limited, having its registered office at 153 Okhla Industrial Estate Phase III,
New   Delhi­110020.     Subsequently,   its   name   was   changed   to   M/s   Adel
Landmarks Ltd and its registered office was also shifted to B­39, Ground
Floor, Friends Colony (West), New Delhi­110065 which was again shifted
to B­292, Chandrakanta Complex, Shop No. 8, Near Metro Pillar No. 161,
New Ashok Nagar, Delhi­110096, which fact was duly communicated to the
plaintiff.
3.            It   has   been   pleaded   that   the   defendant   company   approached   the
plaintiff  and  induced  him  to  purchase  a  flat  in a  pre­launch  stage of its
project, through meeting/interacting with the executives of the defendant
and   also   through   various   advertisements   in   print   media   and   through   the
brochures of the defendant company.  Plaintiff booked a flat and paid a sum
of Rs. 4,00,000/­ for which the defendant issued a money receipt no. 154
dated   19.11.2010.   Subsequently,   the   plaintiff   paid   Rs.   63,125/­   against
receipt no. 930 dated 11.05.2011, Rs. 3,90,699/­ against receipt no. 1373
dated 21.10.2011 (out of which Rs. 3,69,265/­ were towards basic and Rs.
21,434/­ towards service tax), Rs. 4,82,000/­ against receipt no. RC 187936
dated   02.01.2013   (Rs.   4,63,403   towards   basic   and   Rs.   18,597/­   towards
service   tax).     The   defendant   company   informed   the   plaintiff   that   the
payment   was   in   respect   of   unit   No.   CSM/103/D­0302   at   GGN   103   and


CS No. 860/17                                                                                                                Page 2 of  6
 allotted him customer code as 038/C133233. It has been pleaded that the
plaintiff   entered   into   an   agreement   dated   23.04.2013   with   Sh.   Neeraj
Kulshreshtha, the authorized signatory of the defendant. Thereafter, as per
the agreement, the plaintiff paid an amount of Rs. 3,00,000/­ against receipt
No.   ELL/MKTG/DN/CSM/103,   dated   05.092013   and   Rs.   14,90,000/­
against receipt no. ELL/CSM/001/045 dated 06.03.2014. Defendant failed
to   comply   its   part   of   obligations   as   contained   in   Clause   10   (1)   of   the
agreement dated 23.04.2013 and failed to hand over the possession within
36 months of the execution of the agreement and could not even initiate the
construction activities. The plaintiff in all paid a sum of Rs. 31,25,824/­, as
above.  The plaintiff, by visiting several times, asked the defendant to start
the   construction   but   the   defendant   failed.   Thereafter,   defendant   issued   a
letter no. ELL/COMM/018/071 dated 01.01.2013 to the plaintiff threatening
him of charging the interest @ 18 p.a. on the delayed payment without even
initiating/undertaking the construction activities of the project.  Hence, the
plaintiff has filed the present suit. 
4.            The   plaintiff,   in   the   present   suit,   has   claimed   an   interest   of   Rs.
14,89,054/­ in all @ 10% p.a. (simple) over the amount he has already paid
i.e.   Rs.  31,25,840/­.  Hence,   the  plaintiff   has   claimed   a   total  sum   of  Rs.
46,14,878/­   in   the   present   suit.   Plaintiff   served   a   legal   notice   dated
13.11.2017

 upon the defendant but the defendant neither replied to it nor complied with the requirements of the same.   It has been pleaded that this court   has   the   territorial   jurisdiction   to   entertain,   try   and   dispose   of   the present  suit.  Cause of  action   arose in favour of  the plaintiff to file  the present suit.

CS No. 860/17                                                                                                                Page 3 of  6

5. Summons of the suit were issued to the defendant, who was duly served on 02.02.2018 and Ms. Pushpa Dabas AR of the defendant company appeared on 15.02.2018. However, no written statement was filed on behalf of   the   defendant.   On   17.05.2018   an   application   under   Section   8   of Arbitration   &   Conciliation   Act   was   filed   on   behalf   of   the   defendant. Though,   advance   copy   of   the   said   application   was   supplied   to   the   Ld. Counsel for plaintiff but its court copy was never filed on record.  Since no one appeared on behalf of the defendant, its application under Section 8 of Arbitration   and   Conciliation   Act,   was   dismissed   for   non   prosecution   on 16.08.2018 and it was proceeded against exparte.

6. The plaintiff lead his evidence and examined himself as PW1 and tendered his evidence by way of affidavit as Ex. PW1/1. He has relied upon documents i.e. Ex. PW1/AA, which is the cash receipt of Rs. 4 lac dated 19.11.2010;

Ex.   PW1/B   which   is   the   cash   receipt   of   Rs.   63,125/­     dated   11.05.2011;

Ex. PW1/C as the cash receipt of Rs. 3,90,699/­ dated 21.10.2011; Ex. PW1/D as the letter dated 02.01.2013 of defendant   company   acknowledging receipt of amount Rs. 4,82,000/­; Ex. PW1/E as the agreement between the plaintiff and the defendant  company dated 23.04.2013;

Ex.   PW1/F  as   the  letter  dated   05.11.2013   of   defendant   company   acknowledging the receipt of Rs. 3 lac;

Ex.   PW1/G   as   the   letter   dated   06.03.2013   of   the   defendant   acknowledging the receipt of Rs. 14,90,000/­;

CS No. 860/17                                                                                                                Page 4 of  6

Ex. PW1/H as the letter dated 03.02.2015 of defendant company   acknowledging   the   past   received   amount   and   demanding   further   balance amount from the plaintiff;

Ex. PW1/I as the letter dated 01.01.2013 informing the plaintiff about the allotment of flat bearing no. CSM/103/D­0302; Ex. PW1/J as the legal notice served upon the defendant company by  the plaintiff dated 13.11.2017;

Ex. PW1/K (colly) are the postal receipts confirming the service of  legal notice upon the defendant company. 

Ex. PW1/L (colly) are the computer tracking report of delivery of   legal  notice upon the defendant;

Ex. PW1/M as the photocopy of his Aadhar card

7.  Thereafter, plaintiff closed his exparte evidence. 

8. I have heard Sh. Naresh Kumar - Ld. Counsel for plaintiff and have also perused the records of the case. 

9. The   testimony   of   PW1   remained   unrebutted,   uncontroverted   and unchallenged. The documents relied upon by him as above, prove that the defendant is a private limited company, incorporated under the Companies Act and the plaintiff had booked a flat at the pre lauch stage, in its project which was to be developed and constructed by it. The total basic price of the said   flat   as   per   the   agreement   Ex.   PW1/P   was   fixed   at   Rs.   51,82,060/­. However,   the   defendant   company   despite   having   received   a   substantial amount from the plaintiff, failed to initiate the construction of the project and   thus,   violated   the   terms   of   the   agreement,   which   stipulated   that   the construction   would   be   complete   within   thirty   six   months   of   the   date   of CS No. 860/17                                                                                                                Page 5 of  6 agreement with grace period of six months. The said agreement was entered into on 23.04.2013.  The present suit has been filed on 14.12.2017 i.e. after the   expiry   of   the   agreed   period   and   even   the   grace   period.     Hence,   the plaintiff   is   entitled   for   the   recovery   of   the   amount   paid   by   him   to   the defendant along with interest, since the principal amount has been used and enjoyed by the defendant without starting the construction. 

10. The   suit   has   been   filed   within   limitation   as   the   plaintiff   became entitled for the recovery after the expiry of the grace period, as aforesaid, which   expired   in   October   2017.     The   registered   office   of   the   defendant company   is   in   east   district   and   therefore   this   court   has   the   territorial jurisdiction  as well as the pecuniary jurisdiction to decide the present suit. A proper court fees has been paid and affixed on the plaint. 

11. In view thereof, the suit of the plaintiff is decreed in  his favour and against the defendant in the sum of Rs. 46,14,878/­ (inclusive of interest on the principle amount) which shall be paid by the defendant to the plaintiff. The   plaintiff   is   also   entitled   to   further   interest   @   10%   p.a.   on   the   said amount from the date of filing of the present suit till its actual realization. Cost of the suit are also awarded in favour of the plaintiff. 

Decree sheet be prepared accordingly. 

File be consigned to Record Room. 

Digitally signed by
ANNOUNCED IN OPEN COURT                                                              SANJAY                            SANJAY SHARMA
                                                                                                                       Location: Delhi
ON 22nd  Day of  December 2018                                                       SHARMA                            Date: 2018.12.22
                                                                                                                       15:15:53 +0530
                                                                                            (SANJAY SHARMA­I)
                                                                                        Addl. District Judge­02 (East)
                                                                                           Karkardooma Courts, Delhi.




CS No. 860/17                                                                                                                Page 6 of  6