State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Greenwoods Government Officers ... vs Shri Farhan Chaudhary on 5 September, 2024
Cause Title/Judgement-Entry STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, UP C-1 Vikrant Khand 1 (Near Shaheed Path), Gomti Nagar Lucknow-226010 First Appeal No. A/1057/2023 ( Date of Filing : 27 Jun 2023 ) (Arisen out of Order Dated 29/05/2023 in Case No. Complaint Case No. CC/100/2019 of District Gautam Buddha Nagar) 1. Greenwoods Government Officers Welfare Society Through its Secretary Sri Nand Kumar Mishra, I.P.S.(Retired) Add.-231, Greenwoods Goverment Officers welfare Society Phase-1,Pocket-P2,Sec-Omega-1, Greater Noida, Gautam Buddh Nagar,U.P.-201315 ...........Appellant(s) Versus 1. Shri Farhan Chaudhary Through Shri M.N.A Chaudhary,182 Greenwoods, Phase-1,P2, Omega-1 Greater Noida,UP-201306 ...........Respondent(s) BEFORE: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PRESIDENT PRESENT: Dated : 05 Sep 2024 Final Order / Judgement ORAL STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, UTTAR PRADESH, LUCKNOW APPEAL NO. 1236 OF 2023 FARHAN CHAUDHARY, 182-GREENWOODS GOVT. OFFICERS WELFARE SOCIETY, P-2, OMEGA-1, GEATER NOIDA, GAUTAM BUDH NAGAR, UP-201315..... ....Appellant VERSUS GREENWOODS GOVERNMENT OFFICERS WELFARE SOCIETY, P-2, OMEGA- 1, GREATER NOIDA, GAUTAM BUDH NAGAR, UP-201315..... .....Respondent AND APPEAL NO. 1057 OF 2023 Greenwoods Government Officers Welfare Society, Registered through its Secretary Sri Nand Kumar Mishra, I.P.S. (Retired)..... ....Appellant VERSUS Sri Farhan Chaudhary, Through Sri M. N. A Chaudhary..... .....Respondent BEFORE: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR, PRESIDENT Dated : 05-09-2024 JUDGMENT
BY MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR, PRESIDENT Both the above mentioned appeals are arising out the same judgment and order, therefore, they are being decided by a common judgment and order.
-2-The above mentioned appeals are filed against the judgment and order 29-05-2023 passed by the Learned District Consumer Commission, Gautam Buddh Nagar in Complaint Case No.100/2019; Farhan Chaudhary Vs Greenwoods Government Officers Welfare Society & Another, The appeal no.1236/2023 has been filed by the appellant/ complainant Sri Farhan Chaudhary on whose behalf his father Sri M.N.A. Chaudhary, advocate registered with Delhi Bar Association is present.
The appeal no.1057/2023 has been filed by the opposite party GREENWOODS GOVERNMENT OFFICERS WELFARE SOCIETY on whose behalf learned Counsels Sri Digvijay Nath Dubey, Sri Piyush Mani Tripathi and Miss Jaya Pandey are present.
Heard Counsels for the respective parties.
The instant appeals have been filed against the impugned judgment and order dated 29-05-2023 passed by the Learned District Consumer Commission, Gautam Buddh Nagar in Complaint Case No.100/2019; Farhan Chaudhary Vs Greenwoods Government Officers Welfare Society & Another, by which the Learned District Consumer Commission has passed the following order :-
"1. The prayer of the complainant to direct the OPs not to insist on payment of premium amount is dismissed.
2. The OPs shall handover physical possession of flat on pre-paid price to complainant without any enhancement with in 30 days from the date of payment of premium amount by complainant to OPs.
3. The complainant is not entitled to get any other relief from the OPs Application(s) pending, -3- if any, stand disposed of in terms of the aforesaid Order.
A copy of this Order be provided to all the parties free of cost as mandated by the Consumer Protection Act, 1986/2019.
The Order be uploaded forthwith on the website of the commission for the perusal of the parties.
File be consigned to record room along with a copy of this Order."
Briefly the facts of the case are that the Greenwoods Government Officers Welfare Society is a registered body to render assistance to the members of the society in acquiring suitable accommodation as provided in Aims and Objects of the society. The society has acquired 4835.50 sq. mt. land at Plot No. 1, Informal Sector, Greater Noida vide correction deed executed on 01.12.2006 with Greater Noida Authority known as Phase 1 extension and offered flats to be built at Phase 1 extension vide their e-mail offer letter dated 17.04.2014 for nominees of members of society at basic price of Rs.70,00,000/-. The father of the complainant Mr. MNA Chaudhary having Membership No. 261 of the society with Unit No. 182 in Phase 1 exercised his option along with requisite amount to nominate the complainant petitioner for allotment of a flat in proposed complex.
The complainant petitioner deposited the basic purchase price of flat in installments aggregating to Rs.70,00,000/- as demanded by the society for the proposed construction of multi-story flat in Phase 1 extension project.
The society entered into an agreement with M/s Mihir Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. on 01.10.2015 to construct 32 flats in 8 story building having 4 flats on each floor to be completed in 15 months with contract validity -4- of 18 months. The complainant petitioner followed the instructions of society and made the entire payment in installments as demanded by it.
The management committee of the society in their meeting held on 24.09.2016 decided and was agreed to call the meeting of all members on 16.10.2016 to see the sample flat and take part in draw of lots. The allotment parameter of the flats was also decided in the meeting, in which 1 and 2 floors to be premium floors with additional charge of Rs. 3.50 lakh per flat and if there are less than 8 applicants and some allotee get these floors in the normal draw, premium chargeable from them would be Rs.2,00,000/- and mutual exchange would be permissible up to a week after the draw. The complainant paid Rs.50,00,000.00 in installment in accordance with the decision of the society, he became eligible to participate in draw of lots for 24 flats on 16.10.2016. The complainant nominated Mr. Hasan Ali, a member of the society to participate in the draw of society on the behalf of complainant on 16.10.2016.
In Para 6 of Minutes of Management Committee meeting of the society dated 16.10.2016 it was finally agreed to follow the following steps :-
1) Allot 4 flats on the 1 floor to 8 applicants who had applied within the stipulated time and agreed to pay the premium amount of Rs.3.50 lakh each.
2) The 2nd floor should be included in the general draw but the allotees would be bound to pay the declared premium of Rs.2 lakhs for each flat.-5-
3) All members who have paid the amount due as on date that is Rs.50 lakh for more would be given prerogative to select the flat of their choice.
4) The remaining flats including the premium flats on 2nd floor would form part of the general draw.
5) After the draw members would be allowed to exchange through mutual consent on the spot or up to 30.10.2016 at the latest.
6) Dissatisfied members could also register their request with the Secretary for change in event of withdrawal, cancellation or non-acceptance to pay the premium particularly by the allotees of the 2nd floor.
There were only 4 applicants for 8 flats on 1st and 2nd floors with additional charge of Rs. 3.50 lakh per flat but only 4 flats on 1st Floor were taken for draw as premium floor flats with additional charge of Rs. 3.50 lakhs ignoring 4 flats on 2nd floor.
There was no applicant of 4 premium flat so the decision of the society to charge premium of Rs.2 lakh is unjust and arbitrary. The draw of lets held on 28 flats including 4 flats of 2nd floor with forced premiun is unjust, unapproved and arbitrary.
The complainant did not receive any communication sent on 16.10.2016 to him after the draw on 16.10.2016 as provided in Minutes of Meeting of MC of society to lodge objection on the procedure of allotment for 4 flats on 2nd floor.
The complainant sent replies dated 28.01.2019 and 12.02.2019 to the Convener of PMC requesting the reversal of unjustified MC decision dated 16.10.2016 to demand the payment of forced premium of -6- Rs.2,00,000/- by the current MC of the society. The fare and reasonable opportunity were not upholded to the complainant to contest the enhancement as alleged. The impugned order dated 16.10.2016 was neither served nor supplied to the complainant. When complainant got the knowledge, the complainant at once sent letters dated 27.01.2019 and 02.02.2019 but the OP No. 1 refused to reverse the unjustified demand. It amounts to deficiency of service and unfair trade practice.
It was fully proved and established that when the total amount of allotted flat is paid by written contract between the parties and the time of delivery of allotted flat with consideration has been fixed, the contract has become complete otherwise there will be violation of terms of contract but OPs failed to this principle of law by which the OPs come under the term of deficiency in service. When the total amount of the allotted flat is already paid, the price to be applied would be the price paid and not the price prevailing at the time of delivery.
The complainant was expecting delivery of flat within 15 months from the date of agreement on 01.10.2015 between the society and M/s Mihir Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. but it has not been given to the complainant within extended 10 months taken by GNIDA in approving the drawing of the project. Levy of compound interest at the rate 10% is highly unjustified as even the validity period of the contract agreement for completion of flat ended on 30.01.2018 but the flats are still under construction.
Being aggrieved by the act of the opposite party, the complainant filed a complaint before the ld. District Consumer Commission in which the opposite party filed their written statement stating therein that the -7- father of the complainant Shri MNA Chaudhary having membership no. 261 of the society, nominated the complainant for allotment of a flat in proposed complex. The society entered into an agreement with M/s. Mihir Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. on 01.10.2015 to be completed in 15 months with contract validity for 18 months subject to approval of GNIDA and the approval was received on 02.05.2016.
The OPs have further submitted that the father of the complainant Shri MNA Chaudhary has been a member and latter stood as a Treasurer of the Managing Committee of the society during years 2014-2018 and also a member of PMC from the initial constitution of PMC from 07.09.2014 to 04.02.2018. He was actively involved in day-to-day supervision, daily visit to site, payment to contractor and sub-contractors.
On 16.10.2016 a draw of lots was held and complainant's representative Shri Hasan Ali was present in the draw and put his signature in the list of attendees. All the prospective allotees of the 20 floor paid the premium amount of Rs. 2 lakhs except the complainant. The father of the complainant Shri MNA Chaudhary was present in the meeting held on 24.09.2016 and the complainant's representative Shri Hasan Ali was present and appended his signature on Minutes of the Meeting held on 16.10.2016. The complainant instead of paying the premium amount opted to file the present complaint with the intention of making personal gain and as on afterthought.
The OPs have also submitted that the present complaint is barred by limitation as the complainant's father Shri MNA Chaudhary was present in the meeting held on 24.09.2016 and he has full knowledge -8- about the draw of lots to be held on 16.10.2016. It is admitted fact that the representative of the complainant participated in the draw of lots held on 16.10.2016 and appended his signature and the limitation got activated on 16.10.2016.
The OPs have further submitted that the present complaint exceed the pecuniary jurisdiction of this Hon'ble Forum as total cost of the flat is more than Rs.70,00,000/- and the complainant is seeking possession of the flat and prayed this Hon'ble Forum to direct the OP society not to demand Rs. 2 lakhs which is payable by the complainant along with compensation and cost besides interest at the rate of 10% on total amount.
The OPs have further submitted that no member of a society is in any way a consumer as enumerated under Section 2(d) of the CP Act. The father of the complainant Shri MNA Chaudhary was a member of the society and he nominated the complainant for allotment of flat in Phase 1 extension and he is one of the allotees in society. Hence, the complainant and allotee of flat in OP society is also a member of the OP society and have no locus-standi to file the present complaint against the OP society.
At last, the OPs have prayed that the complaint is not maintainable against the OPs and hence deserves to be dismissed with exemplary costs.
After hearing the parties the Learned District Consumer Commission has allowed the complaint as mentioned above.
Being aggrieved by the judgment and order of the Learned District Consumer Commission appeal no.1057 of 2023 has been filed -9- by the opposite party Greenwood Government Officers Welfare Society for setting aside the impugned judgment and order while the appeal no.1236 of 2023 has been filed by the complainant Farhan Chauhary for enhancement.
The appellant Farhan Chaudhary claims that he is residing with his father is allotted a plot by a registered Society of which he is one of the Member of the society.
The said Society has been allotted 1,21,410 Sq. Meter land by the Greater Noida Industrial Authority, U.P. by which the opposite party Green Woods Government Officers Welfare Society has been allotted the said land.
As against the said allotted land actual possession of land of 1,16,574 Sq. Meter has been handed over by the authority to the opposite party/Society. The total value of such a big land was paid by the Members of the Society only to the tune of Rs. 10,01,63,200/- (Rupees Ten Crores One Lakh Sixty Three Thousand and Two Hundred Only).
Accordingly the value of 01 Sq. Meter land was only determined @ 8.25 Rupees. The said land has been allotted by the authority to the opposite party/society in the year 1995-96 and the physical possession of the said land was given in the year 1999-2000.
The Learned District Consumer Commission while considering the submissions of learned Counsel for the respective parties as elaborately mentioned the same in its judgment and order. Accordingly the above mentioned order has been passed.
-10-Aggrieved by the said order, the instant appeal as well as connected appeal no.1057/2023 has been filed by the office bearer of the Society/Opposite Party Green Wood Government Officers Welfare Society.
Prima-facie from the perusal of the record and the from the submissions of the learned Counsel for the respective parties, this Court finds that there is dispute with the office bearer of the society who are retired IAS/IPS Officials and other Members of the Society who are also retired IAS/IPS and IRS.
From the perusal of the record, this Court finds that the matter is related to certain dispute between the Members/Office Bearer of the Society, for which this Court is not a competent Court nor there is any consumer dispute involved in the instant appeals.
Let accordingly the parties may approach the competent Court of Law or the authorities in accordance with law.
ORDER The appeal no.1236 of 2023 is dismissed. The connected appeal no.1057 of 2023 is allowed and the impugned judgment and order dated 29.5.2023 passed in complaint case no.100 of 2019 is set aside. The parties are at liberty to approach the competent Court of Law or the authorities in accordance with law.
A certified copy of this order be placed on the record of connected Appeal No.1057 of 2023.
If any amount deposited by the appellant shall be returned to the appellant in Appeal No.1057 of 2023 alongwith interest accrued in accordance with law.
The Stenographer is requested to upload this order on the website of this Commission at the earliest.
(JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR) PRESIDENT Ashish Court-1 [HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR] PRESIDENT