ALLIED INFRAZONE & DEVELOPERS PVT LTD project namely Premium Homes in Gulmohar Valley Lalru where refund granted for delay.
HEMLATA v. ALLIED INFRAZONE & DEVELOPERS PVT LTD
COMPLAINANT:
- Hemlata, wife of Kuldeep Singh
- Kuldeep Singh, son. Of Sh. Sham Singh
OPPOSITE PARTIES:
- Allied Infrazone & Developers Pvt. Ltd
- Syed Hussain Shanaz, The Director, Allied Infrazone & Developers Pvt. Ltd
- Punjab Empires Pvt. Ltd
- Randhir Sood, The Director, Punjab Empires Pvt. Ltd.
- The Dewan Housing Finance Corporation Ltd
CORUM:
Sh. Rajan Dewan, President
Smt. Priti Malhotra, Member
Sh. Ravinder Singh, Member
Also Read- Hemlata v. Allied Infrazone & Developers Pvt. Ltd. – CaseMine
FACTS:
The complainants had applied, on 8.05.2014 with Ops no.1 and 3 for residential flat in the project namely Premium Homes of Ops no.3 and 4 in Gulmohar valley, Lalru. district SAS Nagar, Punjab for personal use and the total cost of the flat was Rs. 12,39,000/-. Complainant paid Rs. 60,000/- to the opposite parties on 14.5.2014 along with the application form and then paid Rs. 1,20,000/- on 23.6.2014 and Rs.1,20,000/- on 20.8.2014 respectively with Opposite Parties no. 1 and 2 against receipt. Thereafter, the complainants and opposite parties no. 3 and 4 have entered into Apartment Buyer Agreement on 17.10.2014 and paid Rs. 39,000/- in cash to opposite parties no.3 and 4. It is averred that the opposite parties No. 3 & 4 allotted Flat no. 347-C, measuring 645 sq. ft on 2nd floor, Premium Homes, Gulmohar Valley, wide allotment letter dated 25.02.2015. It is also averred that as per Cluse No. 10 of the Apartment Buyer Agreement the opposite parties no. 3 & 4 were to deliver the possession of the said flat to the complainant within 24 months from the date of execution of the agreement. It is submitted that the complainant also availed loan from opposite parties no. 5 for the said flat and paying the regular instalment to the opposite parties as well as of loan amount and this way the complainant paid total of Rs.10,80,689/- to the opposite parties. It is also submitted that the complainants visited the site in 2016 and 2017, but the work at the site as well as the allotted flat had not been completed. As such the complainant sort refund from the opposite parties of that a positive amount, but to no avail.
Also Read- Allied Infrazone & Developers Pvt. Ltd. v. Hemlata – CaseMine
ARGUMENTS BY THE COUNSEL FOR THE OPPOSITE PARTIES:
According to the counsel for the opposite parties no. 1 and 2, they were engaged to monitor, supervise and to receive the payments on behalf of M/s Punjab Empires Pvt. Ltd or Ops no. 3 & 4. Ops no. 1 & 2 took Rs. 6 lacs and paid it to Ops no. 3& 4 before the execution of the Apartment Buyer Agreement, which is the actual developer of Premium Homes. It was stated that ops no. 1 & 2 did not give any assurance about the delivery of the flat. Payments were made to Ops no. 3 and 4 and the possession was to be delivered by Ops no.3 & 4 only. Ops no.1 & 2 pleaded for no deficiency in service and denied the rest of the allegation and prayed for the dismissal of the complaint qua them.
Also Read- Builder Delaying Possession. What Is Your Right?
According to Ops no. 3 & 4, they have denied that they have failed to deliver the possession of the flat to the complainants. The flat in question has been fully finished in all aspects within a stipulated period of two years and it is the complainant who did not come forward to pay the balance amount of more than Rs. 2 lacs plus registration charges, to take the possession in time. It was also stated that the complainant had purchased the flay not for personal reasons but with the intention to make profits by selling it further. Ops no. 3 & 4 are willing to give possession to the complainants subject to clearance of all dues.
According to Ops no. 5, the flat was mortgaged to it against an amount of Rs. 4,41,689/-, which is payable by the complainant. It was stated that ops no. 5 is only a financer who, on the application of the complainants had agreed to finance a loan facility to them and as such paid an. amount of Rs. 4,41,689/-. It denied other allegations and prayed for the dismissal of the compliant against itself.
Also Read- Builders fail to give flat on time, penalised – The Tribune
JUDGEMENT:
According to the court, the opposite parties have failed to execute and develop the property as per the commitment despite a lapse of 4 years. In a report submitted on 29.7.2018, it was reported that the flat in question is in such a shabby condition, which is not worth habitation. There were several shortcomings in the construction material used in the flat. The Opposite parties have taken the money in 2014 from the complainant, but they have not shown any curtesy to furnish the flat in question to the satisfaction of the complainant despite various opportunities offered to them by this Forum during the pendency of this complaint. thus, the acts and conduct of the Ops amount to indulgence into unfair trade practice and also gross deficiency in service towards the complainant causing them mental agony, physical harassment and financial loss.
Ops no. 1 & 2 are equally liable along with Ops no. 3 & 4, since they booked the flat in question, received the booking amount and engaged to monitor and supervise the project in question.
Also Read- Renu Bajaj & Anr. vs Best Zone Builders & Developers
The court held Ops no, 1 to 4 liable and jointly and severally directed them to refund the total amount of Rs. 10,80,689/- to the complainants, with interest @12% per annum from the respective date of deposit and also pay compensation of Rs. 50,000/0 for causing mental and physical harassment along with litigation cost of Rs. 10,000/-, within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
Also Read- Harjinder Kaur vs Shiwalik Planners Pvt. Ltd. on 8 March, 2019
This post is written by Gopika Thakur.
For case specific advice, please connect with Top Best Expert Legal Consultants Attorneys in Real Estate/Property Estate/Consumer Court and Consumer Protection Dispute/ Consumer Grievances and Complaints/RERA Lawyers Advocates in Chandigarh Panchkula Mohali Kharar Derabassi Zirakpur etc.
More on 99888-17966.
