State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Society For Consumers And Investors ... vs Dda on 31 August, 2015
Daily Order IN THE STATE COMMISSION : DELHI (Constituted under Section 9 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986) Date of Decision: 31.08.2015 Complaint No. 46/2013 The Society for Consumers' and Investors' Protection (SCIP), 118, IInd Floor, DDA Site-I, New Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi-110060. M/s Allwell Capital Pvt. Ltd., Through its authoried person Mr. Ankur Sachdeva, 1E/18, 4th Floor, Jhandewalan Extension, New Delhi-110055. ......Complainants Versus Vice Chairman, Delhi Development Authority, Vikas Sadan, INA, New Delhi-110023. Deputy Director (Old Scheme Branch), Delhi Development Authority, A-Block, Vikas Sadan, INA, New Delhi-110023. ....OPs CORAM Justice Veena Birbal, President Salma Noor, Member
OP Gupta,Member(Judicial)
1. Whether reporters of local newspaper be allowed to see the judgment?
2. To be referred to the reporter or not?
Justice Veena Birbal, President Present is a complaint under Section 17(a)(i) read with Section 18 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (in short 'the Act') wherein it is alleged that complainant No.1 is the society for consumers and investors protection which was formed by group of eminent professionals from different areas. The society is registered with the Registrar of Societies, New Delhi since 1989. The complainant No.2 is a Private Limited Company. In August 2003, the OP announced a scheme of conversion from leasehold plots into freehold for Commercial Plots including Mixed Land Use Plots etc. The scheme is an ongoing optional scheme which can be availed of by the holder/owner of a leasehold property into freehold at any time. The complainant No.2 applied for conversion of his property No.3E/7, Jhandewalan Extension, New Delhi and submitted relevant documents after getting the amount of conversion charges worked out from OP. The amount worked out was also deposited with OP on 13.3.10. Thereafter complainant No.2 had been following up the matter with OP but the needful was not done. On 31.1.11, OP sent a letter to the complainant No.2 requiring him to deposit a further sum of Rs.31,34,949/- which included an amount of Rs.31,00,856/- towards "Balance Conversion Charges". The same were paid by the complainant No.2 vide bank draft No.107919 on 09.02.2011. In October 2011, the complainant No.2 had filed an application under Right to Information Act requiring information from OP about the basis on which the existing demand was made. The OP replied to the said application and in the said reply, calculations were showing the area of plot as 222 sq. yards and FAR as 300%. It was alleged that excessive charges were taken from the complainant No.2 on the basis of arbitrary figure of FAR of 300%. The complainant No.2 sent a legal notice for refund of amount of Rs.31,00,856/- along with 18% interest. But no response was given. Ultimately, the present complaint is filed wherein the following prayers are made:
"a) Direct the Respondent to refund the amount of Rs. 31,00,856/- along with interest @ 18% per annum from the date of payment by the Complainant No.2 to the Respondent till the disposal of the present complaint.
Direct the Respondent to pay compensation amounting to Rs.5,00,000/- for the deficiency in service on account of unwarranted delay, harassment, mental tension, frustration and financial loss to the Complainant No.2.
c) Direct the Respondent to pay an amount of Rs.25,000/- as the cost of litigation to the Complainants.
d) Pass any other/further order(s) as the Hon'ble Commission may deem fit in the interest of justice."
The OP has filed written statement wherein it is stated that the present complaint has become infructuous as the OP has already written a letter dated 5.12.14 to the complainant informing that the matter regarding Development CONTROL Norms of Jhandewalan Extension is under consideration and the finalization will take time and also informed that they can apply for refund of conversion charges i.e. charges above the actual/permissible FAR which will be paid along with interest @ 7% per annum from the date of deposit till the date of refund.
On merits, the allegations against the OPs are denied.
Counsel for complainant submitted that since the main prayer of the complainant about refund of Rs.31,00,856/- has been accepted by the OP, the only dispute left is about rate of interest. It is stated that the complainant is not pressing for prayer (b) and (c) of the present case. It is stated that the rate of interest on the refund amount as offered by the OP is on lower side and the complainant is only praying for enhancement of interest. It is stated that there is no need for any evidence in the present case and the arguments on interest amount be heard and appropriate order be passed in the matter.
The Counsel for the OP has stated that OP has already agreed for the refund amount with interest @ 7% per annum from the date of deposit till the date of refund. The court may award appropriate interest.
In view of above submissions, the only controversy left is only about rate of interest on the amount which DDA has offered to refund.
The letter of OP dated 5.12.14 by which refund with 7% has been offered by OP reads as under:
"With reference to above it is informed that the matter regarding Development Control Norms of Jhandewalan Extn. is under consideration and their finalization may take some time. In between, if so desired you can apply for refund of conversion charges i.e. charges above the actual/permissible FAR which will be paid along with interest @ 7% per annum from the date of deposit till the date of refund."
As noted above, the only controversy is about rate of interest on Rs.31,00,856/- which the OP had taken from complainant No.2. The complainant No.2 has been deprived of substantial amount for a long period. The rate of interest offered by DDA is on lower side. Even bank's rate of interest on fixed deposit is 8.25% per annum.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we consider it appropriate to award 9% interest on the amount of Rs.31,00,856/- which DDA/OP has agreed to refund. The OP shall refund the amount of Rs.31,00,856/- along with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of deposit till the date of refund. OP is directed to pay the payment within 8 weeks from the date of receipt of this order to the complainant No.2.
No further orders are required on the complaint.
The complaint stands disposed of accordingly.
A copy of this order as per the statutory requirement be forwarded to the parties free of charge and also to the concerned District Forum and thereafter the file be consigned to Record Room.
(Justice Veena Birbal) President (Salma Noor) Member (OP Gupta) Member (Judicial) sa