State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Col Raj Sheoran vs M/S Dlf Homes Panchkula Private Limited on 12 December, 2024
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,
U.T. CHANDIGARH
[ADDITIONAL BENCH]
============
Ex e. A p p lic a ti o n N o. : EA / 3 2/ 2 02 4
[ U/ s 7 1 o f C PA , 2 019 ]
Da t e o f I ns ti tu ti o n : 07/ 05/ 20 24
Da t e of D ec is i on : 12/ 12/ 20 24
1. Col. Raj Kumar Sheoran son of Sh. Jailal
Sheoran, Resident of H.No. E-2/4-GF, DLF Valley
Panchkula, Sector 3, Pinjore Kalka, Urban
Complex, Panchkula - 134107.
2. Mrs. Sangeeta Sheoran wife of Col. Raj Kumar
Sheoran, Resident of H.No. E-2/4-GF, DLF Valley
Panchkula, Sector 3, Pinjore Kalka, Urban
Complex, Panchkula - 134107.
--- Complainants/Decree Holders
V E R S U S
1. M/s DLF Homes Panchkula Pvt. Ltd., (Through MD/
Authorized Representative), Regd. Office, 12 t h
Floor, DLF Gateway Tower Building, DLF City,
Phase-III, National Highway, Gurugram - 122002.
Alt. Address - DLF Homes Panchkula Pvt. Ltd.,
Corporate and Sales Office #F-2/3, The Valley,
Sector 3, Pinjore Kalka Urban Complex, Village
Bhagwanpur, Islamnagar, Panchkula, Haryana -
134105.
2. Director(s) & CRM (Vineet Kanwar, Rajeev Singh,
Harsh Deep Sachdeva (Directors) & Rohit Sharma
(CRM), DLF Homes Panchkula Pvt. Ltd., Corporate
& Sales Office #F-2/3, The Valley, Sector 3,
Pinjore Kalka Urban Complex, Village Bhagwanpur,
Islamnagar, Panchkula, Haryana - 134105.
...... Respondents/Judgment Debtors
3. Director General & Country Town Planner,
Department of Town & Country Planning, Haryana,
Plot No.3, Sector 18-A, Madhya Marg, Chandigarh
- 160018.
...... Proforma Opposite Party
--2--
BEFORE: MRS. PADMA PANDEY PRESIDING MEMBER
PREETINDER SINGH MEMBER PRESENT : Ms. Smriti Kanwar, Advocate for the Decree Holders.
Ms. Tanika Goel, Advocate for the Judgment Debtor No.1. None for Judgment Debtors No.2 & 3.
PER PADMA PANDEY, PRESIDING MEMBER
1. The instant execution application has been filed by Col. Raj Kumar Sheoran & Anr., Decree Holders u/s 71 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, for execution of order dated 13.12.2016, passed by this Commission in Consumer Complaint No. 541 of 2016, duly modified by the Hon'ble National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission vide order dated 21.12.2018 in Appeal No. FA/138/2017 filed by the Judgment Debtors wherein while rejecting the appeal, the order of this Commission was confirmed with modification that the interest on the amount payable by the Appellant shall be simple interest @9% per annum. According to the Decree Holders, there had been prolonged non-compliance which renders the Judgment Debtors No.1 & 2 liable to be proceeded against under the provisions of Section 71 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. The Decree Holders, in the prayer clause has claimed numerous reliefs against the Judgment Debtors No.1 & 2
--3--
specified from point (a) to (o), which reads as thus:-
"a) di rect t he JD Nos. 1 and 2 t o pro vide dr aft co nve yance deed to DHs wit h all an nex ur es me ntion ed the re in incl udin g the ma ndat ory do cumen ts for r egist ratio n as ment ione d and requi red in the Buy er Ag reemen t, Conv eyan ce De ed and Conce rned Law s & Pol icies with in 3 0 days ;
b) di rect the JD Nos 1 and 2 to in a tim e-bou nd ma nner, inti mate the c urren t st atus of the Occup ation Cert ific ate d ated 10 /07/2 015 f or the unit and to suppl y the updat ed occ upati on ce rtifi cate r eflec ti ng th e incr ease in a rea;
c) di rect the JD Nos 1 an d 2 to pro vide unit- wise brea k-up of the cove red area and prop ortio nate co mmon area adde d to e ach un it for deter minin g its super area as wel l a s item -wis e bre ak-u p of the commo n area s, a nd all ow oppo rtun ity for r edres sal of a ny discr epancy /sho rtfal l in c overe d/sup er ar ea of the u nit in a time- boun d mann er;
d) di rect time- bound r ectif icati on of l egal d efect s or disc repa ncies in d raft conve yance dee d, if any;
e) di rect JD Nos 1 and 2 to su pply the 'No Encumbr an ce Cert ific ate' for t he sa id un it wi thin 30 d ays;
f) di rect JD No s 1 an d 2 to exec ute a nd reg ister t he Conv eyan ce De ed, and tra nsfer of all righ ts an d amen itie s pro mised to a nd pa id fo r by the DH;
g) di rect th e r efund of the amou nt dema nded and c olle ct ed by JD No. I t oward s th e exc ess are a of 32 0.41 sq. ft.
(as ag ainst th e Occu pa tion C ertif icat e) and 106 sq . f t (as aga ins t Of fer of Pos sessi on) i.e. I NR 3,39, 200 .00/- (Rup ees T hree L akh Th irty N ine T housa nd Tw o H undre d only ) al ong with inte rest @ 1 2% p .a. from paym ent o f
--4--
paym ent t ill r eali zation in th e eve nt of JD No s 1 an d 2 fail ure to ac coun t f or t he i ncrea sed a re a in a l awful mann er w ith r equis ite o ffici al do cume ntati on;
h) di rect in favo ur o f th e DH , i ndemn ity or al ternativ el y, righ t to f uture com pense for a ll i rr egularit ie s/ viol atio ns of DLF in appr ovals , viola tion s in lic ence term s, const ructi on, ma ndato ry compl iance s o f, viol atio ns of s tate govt p olicy , act s, sta tutes an d bind ing laws laid d own by the c ourt ord ers and the like ;
i) im pose puni tive cost s and /or penal ty u nder S. 7 2 o n JD Nos 1 & 2 for non- compl iance of Hon 'ble Comm issi on 's fina l or der da ted 13/12 /2016 in C C/54 1/201 6 fo r a peri od o f 6+ years ;
j) di rect pay ment of INR 5,00, 000/- fr om OP Nos 1 and 2 towa rds d elaye d reg istra tion b y way of gro ss unfai r trad e p rac tices and defic ie ncy in ser vic e wi th inte rest @ 1 2% fr om d ate of act ual posse ssion i.e. 17/1 1/201 7 till date of actua l regi stra tion with requ isite copi es of c once rned pa perwo rk in cludi ng cor recte d OC an d tran sfer of pro mised serv ices a nd a menit ies li ke lawn s/te rrace , etc :
k) di rect pay ment of INR 2,00, 000/- fr om JD Nos 1 and 2 towa rds c ompen satio n for p rolo nged h arass me nt an d ment al a gon y cau sed to the J Ds and injur y/los s suf fere d by the compl ainan ts d ue to the ne glige nce of th e oppo site part ies;
l) di rect pay ment of INR 2,00, 000/- fr om JD Nos 1 and 2 towa rds litig ation expe nses to th e JD s;
m) al low the JDs to fi le objec tions an d/or p la ce addi tion al doc ument s on r ecord as well as mov e appl icat ion for sub missi on of moni es tow ards stam p duty with the Hon'b le S tate C omm is sio n, if req uired in resp onse to t he JD s sub missi ons a nd f iling s;
--5--
n) gr ant l ibert y to t he DHs to a pproa ch thi s Hon 'b le Comm issi on in cas e of non - c omplian ce, supp ly of inco rrec t doc ument ation , or other obj ectio ns; a nd
o) Pa ss su ch furt her o rder (s) / dir ectio n (s ) a s may be nece ssit ated in th e ma tter a nd as may be deeme d appr opri ate by this Hon'b le Com missi on un der th e circ umst ances of t he ca se."
2. Upon notice, Judgment Debtor No.1 appeared through its counsel and vehemently contested the execution application, inter alia, submitting there had never been any non-compliance of orders of this Commission. Before filing of the instant execution application, the order of this Commission has merged in the order of Hon'ble National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission and the same stands complied with. A prayer has therefore been made to dismiss the execution application.
3. We have heard the Learned Counsel for the Parties at length and have gone through the entire record of the case, with utmost care and circumspection.
4. The instant execution application has its genesis from CC/541/2016, which was partly allowed vide order dated 13.12.2016, whereby possession was
--6--
ordered to be delivered along with interest @12% p.a. from 26.12.2016 till 14.01.2017, besides payment of compensation to the tune of ₹1.50 lakh and ₹35,000/- as litigation costs. The order in extenso is reproduced herein below:-
"40. xx x xxx xxx Cons umer Co mplai nts bear ing No : 540 /2016 , 541 /2016 , 574/ 2016 , 5 77/20 16, 583/ 2016 an d 594/2 016: In th ese six case s, th e O pposi te Part ies hav e offe red poss essi on dur ing the p enden cy of the c ompla ints b ut, as alr eady st ated abov e, cop ies of off er of p osses sion lett ers we re not plac ed on rec ord. In case , any all otte e i s eag er to get poss essi on, h e/she will comp lete form aliti es and dep osit the am ount be fore the per iod of si x months , and p ay the dema nd raise d, ex cept the dem ands rais ed towar ds, cont inge nt V AT deposit an d A dvoca te charg es, and as and when , amoun t i s d eposit ed and ot her nece ssary do cumen ts are s ubmit ted, po ssess ion wi ll be ha nded ov er to comp lain ant(s ).
Th e Oppos ite Pa rties , in each of t hese ca ses, ar e, join tly and s evera lly, direc ted a s un der:-
(i) To h and ov er phys ical po sses sion of t he uni t(s), allo tted i n fa vour of th e co mplai nant (s), co mplet e in al l respe cts, t o the comp lain ant(s ), wit hin a peri od of 30 d ays, from the d ate b alanc e pay ment is made /doc ument s are comp leted by t he c ompla inant (s).
(ii) E xecut e a nd ge t regis tered th e s ale deed in res pect of th e unit( s), in ques tion , withi n one mon th fro m the date of h andin g over of posse ssion to t he comp lain ant(s ). The st amp du ty, reg istra tion c harge s and i ncide ntal ex pense s, if an y, s hall be b orne b y the comp laina nt(s) .
--7--
(iii ) To pa y c ompen satio n, by way of intere st @12% p. a., on the depo sited amo unt, to the c ompl ain ant(s ), wi th effe ct fro m 07.0 1.20 14, 26.12 .2014 , 16.1 1.20 13, 27.1 2.20 13, 03.12 .2013 and 20.1 2.20 13 r espec tivel y upti l two month s from t he dat e of of fer of poss essi on i.e . up- to 2 8.12. 2016, 14.0 1.20 17, 14.0 1.20 17, 09. 12.20 16, 09. 12.20 16 an d 25.1 2.201 6 resp ecti vely or up-t o t he d ate on wh ich poss essio n is act uall y hande d over, which ever is ea rlier , with in 45 da ys, f rom the d ate of r eceip t of a cert ifie d copy of this o rd er, fa iling which , the said amo unt s hall carry pen al in teres t @15 % p. a., inst ead o f 12% p.a. , fro m the date of d efaul t, ti ll real izat ion.
(iv) Pa y c ompe nsat ion in t he Rs. 1 ,5 0,0 00/- ag ony, defi cien cy on ph ysic al in No .583/ 2016 sum of accou nt of m ental hara ssm ent a nd se rvice , [ In CC Rs. 1,25 ,000 /-1 and Rs. 35,00 0/- as lit igati on costs , to the com plain ant(s ), withi n 45 da ys from th e d ate of rece ipt of a ce rtif ied c op y of the or der, fail ing whic h, the s aid am ount s ha ll car ry int erest @ 12% p.a. , f rom the date of f iling th e co mpla int(s ) ti ll real izat ion.
In all th ese c ompl aints , as ag reed betwe en the part ies, the Adv ocat e Ch arges sh all not be char ged by the Oppo site Part ies. T he a ctual expe nditu re fo r reg istra tion of S ale De ed(s) besid es Sta mp du ty and Regis trati on char ges, shal l, ho wever , be borne by the c ompla inant (s).
As agre ed, the a moun t of cont ingen t Vat depo sit w ill not be i nsist ed u pon at thi s stage , su bjec t to an affi davi t by t he al lotte e to make the p aymen t as and w hen dema nded b y the G overn ment. T he amo unt o f conti ngent v at, shal l b e p ayabl e b y the com plain ant(s ) as a nd w hen the same b ecome s p ayable by th e O pposi te Part ies to the Gove rnme nt. Th e com plain ant( s) sha ll de posit ed co nting ent vat wi thi n three wee ks when the s ame is paid by Oppo site
--8--
Part ies to t he Gover nment an d t he co mplai nant( s) are info rmed of th is fa ct. Del ay beyon d t hree wee ks f rom the rece ipt of no tice shall attr act s imple inter est @12% per annu m.
Si nce the dema nd(s) ra ised ha ve, by and larg e, been held to be justi fied, in cases wher ever, th ere i s d el ay in maki ng paym ent towa rds de mand rai sed beyo nd two mont hs, peri od take n b eyond two mo nths sha ll be ex clu de d f or the purp ose of pay ment o f 12 % i nter est comp ensat ion on del ayed peri od."
5. Record shows, against the aforesaid order, the Judgment Debtor preferred FA/138/017, wherein vide order dated 03.02.217 the Hon'ble National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission stayed the operation of the order subject to deposit of ₹5.00 lakh with this Commission, within a period of four weeks, which was deposited by the Judgment Debtor on 08.03.2017 vide MA/297/2017. The said appeal was finally disposed of by the Hon'ble National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission vide order dated 21.12.2018, whereby interest granted @12% by this Commission was modified to 9% p.a.
6. Admittedly, the Decree Holders filed MA/138/2019 dated 13.02.2019 seeking release of the aforesaid amount of ₹5.00 lakh deposited with this Commission pursuant to stay granted by the Hon'ble National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission on
--9--
03.03.2017. The said misc. application was allowed vide order dated 13.03.2019 and the amount of ₹5.00 lakh was released along with interest to the Decree Holders. Thereafter, the Decree Holders filed EA/145/2019 on 29.04.2019 which was disposed of by this Commission vide order dated 29.05.2019 by passing the following order: -
"T oday in Cou rt, Sh.Sh iv Kum ar, Advi sor (Lega l) of the ju dgmen t d ebtors has h anded ov er a d emand dr aft bear ing No.51 9560 da ted 2 4.05. 2019 f or an a mount of Rs.5 ,11, 592/- to Sh .R.P. Dang i, Ad vocat e. Couns el for the decr ee hol ders a gains t rece ipt, to sa tisfy a ll cla ims rais ed b y the decr ee ho lders agai nst the j udgme nt de btors .
Sh . S hiv K umar, Ad visor (Le gal) of the judg ment debt ors sta te s that in terms of jud gment pass ed b y Hon'b le Nati onal Cons umer Di spute s Red ressa l Com missi on, New Del hi in Firs t Ap peal No. 531 of 201 6 ti tled 'Pum a Re alto rs P vt. Ltd. V s. Ab ha Ar ora on 1 1.10. 2018, tax a t sour ce has not been de ducte d a s th e a moun t of in teres t pa id i s towar ds comp ensa tion for t he lo ss su ffere d by the decre e hol ders.
Sh . S hiv K umar, Ad visor (Le gal) of the judg ment debt ors furth er st ates t hat a n amo unt of Rs .38, 200/- has been adj usted towa rds V AT et c.
We are s atisf ied o n loo king a t cal cula tion an d as stat ed by Couns el for bo th the parti es that th e en tire liab ilit y sta nds d ischa rged.
Sh .R.P. Dangi , Advo cate, C ouns el for the de cree hold ers has ac cepte d the afo resai d d emand dr aft towa rds full a nd final set tleme nt of all cl aims rais ed by the decr ee hold ers and st ate s t hat on get ting t hi s paym ent
--10--
toda y, no fu rther clai m is lef t aga inst the judg ment debt ors.
Sh . S hiv K umar, Ad visor (Le gal) of the judg ment debt or s tates that appl icat ion s eeki ng clar ific ation is pend ing befo re the Hon 'ble Nati onal Consu mer Dispu tes Redr essa l Co mmis sion, New Delh i a nd if nee d b e, simil ar appl icat ion wil l be ma de befo re the H on' ble Sup reme Co urt of I ndia .
In v iew of abo ve , w e make it ve ry clear that i f a ny adve rse orde r is pa ssed aga ins t th e de cree hol ders and it is f ound that exces s amo unt h as be en pa id, i n tha t eve nt, as un derta ken by Sh.R .P.Da ngi, A dvoca te, Coun se l for the decr ee hold ers, ex cess a mo unt sh all be re turne d to the judg ment debt ors a longw ith inter est @ 9% p.a. (simp le) star ting from toda y til l the date of makin g the paym ent.
In view of abo ve, th is exec utio n app lica tion st ands disp osed of h aving been full y sat isfi ed.
Ce rtifi ed co pies of th is ord er b e give n dast i to the part ies/ their Coun sel f ree o f cha rge. "
7. Learned Counsel for the Judgment Debtor submitted that the entire liability of the Judgment Debtor stood discharged and no further claim survives against the Judgment Debtor. He has submitted that when a decree is executed it attains finality and the second execution is barred by the principle of constructive res-judicata. To substantiate that the Judgment Debtor had complied with the decree, he relied on following calculations:-
--11--
Raj Ku mar Sh eoran - Unit N o. DVF C2/6-SF a t D LF Va lley Panc hkul a.
Calc ulat ion o f com pensa tion 9% co mpen satio n fr om 26. 12.2 014 to 8,64 ,792 /- 14.0 1.20 17 Ment al a gony for a mount of R s. 1,50 ,000 /-
Liti gati on ch arges for amoun t of Rs. 35,0 00/-
Tota l 10,4 9,79 2/-
Amou nt p aid t o Com plainan t
Rs.5 la kh alo ng w ith int . r eleased to 5,00 ,000 /-
Comp lain ants/ DHs vide MA/ 138/ 2019
deci ded on 13 .03.2 019
Bala nce a mount m ade vide De mand Draft 5,11 ,592 /-
No. 5195 60 da ted 2 4.05. 2019
Amou nt a djust ed towar ds V AT as 38,2 00/-
reco rded in or der da ted 29 .05.2 019
whil e di sposi ng EA /145/ 2019
Tota l pa id 10,4 9,79 2/-
Per contra, Learned Counsel for the Decree Holders contended that the final order of Hon'ble National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission dated 21.12.2018 did not detract from directions and liabilities of Judgment Debtor to offer, undertake and finalize the registration for the concerned unit and that the only modification to the order of this Commission was towards the quantum of compensation. It is submitted that the express relief sought under the said EA/145/2019 was for the release of compensation due to the Decree Holders.
--12--
8. It has come on record that the possession was offered to the Decree Holders on 15.11.2016, however, they took possession on 06.05.2017 after completing the formalities and making payment of the balance amount. Learned Counsel for the Judgment Debtor submitted that despite the execution having been satisfied on their part, the Decree Holders are delaying the execution of sale deed by filing frivolous applications for providing the draft of sale deed/occupation certificate/ layout plan of colony/ building etc., which information alongwith draft of conveyance deed was provided to the Decree Holders. Even reminders were sent to the Decree Holders to the aforesaid effect, which is evident from Annexure JD-10.
9. So far as the plea of constructive res- judicata raised by the Learned Counsel for the Judgment Debtors is concerned, we find merit in the same since execution on identical grounds filed by the Decree Holders has been disposed off earlier by this Commission vide order dated 29.05.2019 in EA/145/2019. It is pertinent to add here, the principle of res judicata, rooted in the Latin maxim "res judicata pro veritate accipitur,"
--13--
translates to "a matter adjudged is taken for truth." Essentially, it prevents the same matter from being litigated repeatedly between the parties. Constructive res judicata expands upon this principle by preventing parties from advancing arguments that could and should have been presented in an earlier proceeding but were not. This doctrine enhances the finality of decisions and discourages dilatory tactics aimed at prolonging legal battles. The principle of constructive res judicata is grounded in the larger objective of ensuring efficiency, finality and fairness in judicial proceedings. Allowing parties to raise new arguments in each successive proceeding would not only lead to endless litigation but also undermine the sanctity of judgments.
10. Having perused the prayer clause of the instant execution application, we are of the concerted opinion that the issues raised herein by means of present application do not form part of the final order dated 13.12.2016. Thus, the prayers made herein seem to have no relevance to the context of the final judgment and order. Undisputedly, the Judgment Debtors in compliance of
--14--
the order dated 13.12.2016 has already handed over the physical possession to the Decree Holders and had further acted upon for execution of conveyance deed. So far as for execution of the sale deed is concerned, it imposes an obligation upon both the parties and which are so conditioned that performance by one is conditional on performance by the other and execution cannot be ordered unless the Decree Holders seeking execution offers to perform their side without raising any issues beyond the decree. Thus, ex-facie the Decree Holders are trying to claim those reliefs which were neither the subject matter of the original consumer complaint nor is it in consonance with the tenor of the final judgment and order of this Commission. All this leads to an irresistible conclusion that the Decree Holders are not entitled to the relief prayed for, as the reliefs sought in the present execution is a fragile attempt to amend/ modify the prayers in the initial complaint and the reliefs grant by this Commission, which is impermissible in law.
11. No other point, was urged, by the Learned Counsel for the parties.
--15--
12. Having regard to the factual as well as legal position discussed in paras supra, we do not find any merit in this execution application and the same is hereby dismissed, with no order as to cost.
13. Certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge.
Pronounced 12 t h Dec., 2024 Sd/-
(PADMA PANDEY) PRESIDING MEMBER Sd/-
(PREETINDER SINGH) MEMBER "Dutt"