Reliant Infrastructure Private Ltd Consumer Complaint

This post covers Reliant Infrastructure Private Consumer Complaint when Interest follows when there is an order for refund.

When a court orders a refund on the amount paid by a party, the party’s right to ask for interest follows. This is a settled law which was held by Honourable Supreme Court, and in this case study, The State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission followed the precedent set by The Apex Court and granted interest to the complainant after the order of the refund.

Ms. Ranjana Nanda vs Reliant Infrastructure Private Ltd

Also Read- Reliant Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs Ranjeet Singh Narang 

Brief facts of the case

The complaint purchased a flat which was project done by the opposite party, who gave the complainant assurance that the possession of complete built up flat would be given by December, 2011. Therefore, the complainant and opposite party executed a Byer’s agreement where the total price of the said apartment was Rs.13,50,000/- and the complainant paid the total amount of Rs.13,50,000/-. When the complainant visited the site of the flat to check the status of the construction, the complainant found construction was not complete. Due to this, the complainant sends a legal notice to the opposite party for the refund for the money that was deposited along with interest but to no avail. The complainant further claimed that this act of opposite party leads to deficiency, in rendering service, and indulgence into unfair trade practice. Since the complainant did not get any response regarding the legal notice from the opposite party, the complainant was left with no choice to file a complaint against the opposite party under Section 17 of Consumer Protection Act. {Jurisdiction of the State Commission

(1)  Subject to the other provisions of this Act, the State Commission shall have jurisdiction—

(a) to entertain—

(i) complaints where the value of the goods or services and compensation, if any, claimed 2[exceeds rupees twenty lakhs but does not exceed rupees one crore]; and

(ii) appeals against the orders of any District Forum within the State; and

(b) to call for the records and pass appropriate orders in any consumer dispute which is pending before or has been decided by any District Forum within the State, where it appears to the State Commission that such District Forum has exercised a jurisdiction not vested in it by law, or has failed to exercise a jurisdiction so vested or has acted in exercise of its jurisdiction illegally or with material irregularity.

 [(2) A complaint shall be instituted in a State Commission within the limits of whose jurisdiction, —

(a) the opposite party or each of the opposite parties, where there are more than one, at the time of the institution of the complaint, actually and voluntarily resides or carries on business or has a branch office or personally works for gain; or

(b) any of the opposite parties, where there are more than one, at the time of the institution of the complaint, actually and voluntarily resides, or carries on business or has a branch office or personally works for gain, provided that in such case either the permission of the State Commission is given or the opposite parties who do not reside or carry-on business or have a branch office or personally works for gain, as the case may be, acquiesce in such institution; or

(c) the cause of action, wholly or in part, arises.]}

Also Read- COMPLAINTS before Chandigarh Consumer Court

Reply from the opposite party

No reply from the opposite party as well as none appeared on behalf of the Opposite Party.

Evidence presented by the complainant

1. Two cheques in the sum of in the sum of Rs.6,75,000/-
2. Copy of Buyer’s Agreement

• Legal notice that was send for the refund of the amount deposited that was send by registered post

Observation of the commission

 It is clearly proved that the complainants deposited the total amount of Rs.13,50,000/- in respect of the unit, in question. The evidence presented by the complainant of the buyer’s agreement, duly signed and every page of the Agreement, clearly states that the complainant have paid the total amount of Rs.13,50,000/-. According to the buyer’s agreement, the opposite party should deliver the possession of the apartment by December, 2011 and developer will be liable to pay charges @Rs.5/- per sq. ft. per month for the period of delay in offering the possession of the said apartment beyond the period. However, the opposite party failed to deliver the possession of the flat in question within the specified time. In addition to the opposite party did not respond to the legal notice send by the complainant. The complainant’s issue still remained unsolved as the Opposite Parties preferred not to appear before this Commission. Therefore, the opposite party have no right to retain the money deposited by the complainant and thus entitled to get refunded along with the compensation for inflicting mental agony and causing physical harassment.

Regarding whether interest can be granted with the refund amount, it is established that the complainant has paid Rs.13,50,000/- for the unit in question, which was used by the benefit by the opposite party. According to the buyer’s agreement, if the developer is not at all in a position to offer the apartment, the developer shall offer the purchaser an alternative property or refund the amount in full with interest @10% p.a., without any further liability to pay damages or any other compensation, and the opposite party neither delivered the possession of the unit in question or offered any alternative plot. In the case of UOI vs. Tata Chemicals Ltd (Supreme Court), (2014) 6 SCC 335, it was held that whenever money has been received by a party which ex ae quo et bono ought to be refunded, the right to interest follows, as a matter of course. The obligation to refund money received and retained without right implies and carries with it, the said right. And hence, the complainants are certainly entitled to get refund of the amount deposited by them along with interest @10% p.a., from the respective dates of deposits till realization.

Also Read- Promoter Details – RERA Punjab

Order by the Commission

The opposite party is directed to

1. refund the amount Rs.13,50,000/-, to the complainants, along with interest @10% p.a., from the respective dates of deposits onwards.
2. pay compensation, in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/-, for causing mental agony and physical harassment, to the complainants.

• pay cost of litigation, to the tune of Rs.33,000/- to the complainants.

The payment shall be made, within a period of 02 (two) months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order failing which, penalty of @12% p.a., instead of @10% p.a., from the date of default will carry.

However, it is made clear that, if the complainant, have availed loan facility from any banking or financial institution, for making payment of instalments towards the said unit, such a banking or financial institution will have the first charge of the amount payable, to the extent, the same is due to be paid by the complainant.

Also Read- Reliant Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. v Ram Kumar Garg

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