In this post we will discuss about Sahara India Pariwar Housing Unit SCDRC Appeal wherein The Appellants were directed to refund Rs.92,896/- to the Respondent No.1/complainant alongwith interest @ 18% p.a. instead of 24% p.a. from the respective dates of deposit till payment, within 60 days of its receipt, to pay an amount of Rs.25,000/- to the Respondent No.1/complainant instead of Rs.50,000/-, as consolidated amount of compensation for causing mental agony and harassment on account of deficiency in service and to pay litigation expenses to the tune of Rs.15,000/-.
Also Read- Harsh Verma vs Sahara City Homes
Topic- Consumer Appeal (Sahara India Pariwar Housing Unit vs Deepshika Garg on 19 July, 2017)
Through this analysis, The Commission will try to understand the concept of appeals as seen in State Consumer Dispute Redressal Commissions. This analysis will provide an in-depth assimilation of the extent of the poThe Commissionrs enjoyed by the state consumer dispute Redressal commissions. It will also highlight the remedies that exist in the form of appeals to be made in the state consumer dispute Redressal commissions. Lastly, with the help of the various cases cited in the judgement of this particular case, this analysis will explain the objective behind the formation of such commissions and enlist various ways in which such commissions strive to achieve the same.
ALSO READ- CONSUMER RERA COMPLAINT AGAINST EMAAR MGF LAND LIMITED
Facts
The facts in brief, are that, the complainant in response to the advertisement of the Opposite Parties thereby introducing Sahara City Homes Township at Chandigarh, booked a Unit with them on 24.01.2005 by paying an amount of Rs.85,750/- and also paid an amount of Rs.7146/- on 02.01.2006, through Opposite Party No.3 (now respondent No.2) vide Annexure C-1 and thereafter the complainant received letter dated 9.5.2011 (Annexure C-2) from the authorized signatory of Sahara Prime City Ltd., Chandigarh. It was stated that the complainant was told that the land over 200 acre was purchased, for setting up Sahara City Home at Chandigarh and CLU for 147 acre was also procured. It was further stated that the LOI dated 16.11.2006 was received by Sahara City Homes Chandigarh in which a demand of Rs.15.9 lac INR per acre for EDC was raised against Rs.2.5 lac INR per acre. It was further stated that the company challenged this demand before the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court by filing CWP No.460/07 and later through LPA No.112 of 2009, which is still pending. It was further stated that the Opposite Parties No.1 & 2 are not constructing the units, but wants to grab the money of the complainant, as The Commissionll as other applicants, by filing the frivolous litigation again and again, so that the complainant is forced to seek the refund under compelling circumstances.
Also Read- Bharti Khanna vs Sahara India Pariwar
It was further stated that now the prices of the land, which was purchased by the Opposite Parties to raise the units and shown to the complainant as The Commissionll as to other applicants, has increased multifold and the Opposite Parties before initiating the legal proceedings, had not obtained the consent/option from the applicants whether they are ready to pay their share of Rs.15.9 lacs INR per acre towards EDC, as per the order of the competent authority. It was further stated that the Opposite Parties have filed petitions only to save their skin and not to save the interest of consumers. It was further stated that even after seven years, the Opposite Parties are neither giving a definite date, on which they will complete the project and handover the possession nor denied for the same till date, though promised to deliver the possession in the year 2007, at the time of booking. It was further stated that the complainant also sent a legal notice dated 19.4.2012 vide Annexure C-3 to the Opposite Parties, but to no avail. It was further stated that the aforesaid acts of the Opposite Parties, amounted to deficiency, in rendering service, as also indulgence into unfair trade practice. When the grievance of the complainant, was not redressed, left with no alternative, a complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter to be called as the Act only), was filed.
ALSO READ- MOTIA DEVELOPERS PVT LTD CONSUMER RERA COMPLAINT
The Opposite Parties have filed joint reply and took objections that the complainant is not a consumer and the complaint is time barred. The factual matrix of the case with regard to booking of the unit and making part payment thereof are admitted by the Opposite Parties. It was stated that project could not be completed due to pendency of litigation before the Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh. It was further stated that as soon as the litigation is finally decided, the person to person transfer of flats and fresh subscription can be considered on the price/rate, which will be fixed at the time of launching. It was further stated that the completion of the project of township always depends on necessary approval of various Government Authorities.
Also Read- Sahara India Pariwar vs Wing Commander Akhil Deep … on 15 July, 2010
It was further stated that the Opposite Parties The Commissionre already ready to refund of his provisional subscription amount, as per the terms and conditions, but the complainant has denied for taking the same. It was further stated that the Opposite Parties are still ready to refund the same alongwith simple interest @8% per annum thereon. It was further stated that the present complaint is premature, as no allotment of unit was made in favour of the complainant and the complainant advanced an amount towards provisional membership, only of the scheme, which denotes that, as and when, the project of Sahara City Homes, would be operational, the complainant would be given preference in the allotment of the flat of desired category. It was further stated that there is no deficiency in service on their part, and the ansThe Commissionring Opposite Parties had prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
Also Read- Sahara City Homes directed to refund ₹2L to Chandigarh man
Opposite Party No.3 did not turn up despite service, hence it was proceeded against exparte vide order dated 29.08.2013.
The Parties led evidence, in support of their case.
After hearing the Counsel for the parties, and, on going through the evidence, and record of the case, the District Forum, accepted the complaint, in the manner, referred to, in the opening para of the instant order.
Feeling aggrieved, the instant appeal, has been filed by the appellants/Opposite Parties No.1 & 2.
ALSO READ- GILLCO DEVELOPERS AND BUILDERS PVT LTD CONSUMER RERA CASE
Issues Involved
(i) Whether the appealing parties are liable as held under the judgement given by district consumer disputes Redressal commission?
(ii) Whether the compensation livid on the appellant is of a fair amount?
Also Read- Consumer Complaint of Sahara Company Chandigarh Panchkula Mohali
Rules and Laws
- Section 12 in the Consumer Protection Act, 1986
- Manner in which complaint shall be made.—
- A complaint in relation to any goods sold or delivered or agreed to be sold or delivered or any service provided or agreed to be provided may be filed with a District Forum by—
- (a)the consumer to whom such goods are sold or delivered or agreed to be sold or delivered or such service provided or agreed to be provided;
- (b)any recognised consumer association whether the consumer to whom the goods sold or delivered or agreed to be sold or delivered or service provided or agreed to be provided is a member of such association or not;
- (c)one or more consumers, where there are numerous consumers having the same interest, with the permission of the District Forum, on behalf of, or for the benefit of, all consumers so interested; or
- (d)the Central or the State Government, as the case may be, either in its individual capacity or as a representative of interests of the consumers in general.
- Every complaint filed under sub-section (1) shall be accompanied with such amount of fee and payable in such manner as may be prescribed.
ALSO READ- PRIMARY ESTATES & DEVELOPERS CONSUMER RERA COMPLAINT
- On receipt of a complaint made under sub-section (1), the District Forum may, by order, allow the complaint to be proceeded with or rejected: Provided that a complaint shall not be rejected under this sub-section unless an opportunity of being heard has been given to the complainant: Provided further that the admissibility of the complaint shall ordinarily be decided within The Commission twenty-one days from the date on which the complaint was received.
- Where a complaint is all The Commissioned to be proceeded with under sub-section (3), the District Forum may proceed with the complaint in the manner provided under this Act: Provided that where a complaint has been admitted by the District Forum, it shall not be transferred to any other court or tribunal or any authority set up by or under any other law for the time being in force. Explanation.—For the purposes of this section, “recognised consumer association” means any voluntary consumer association registered under the Companies Act, 1956 (1 of 1956) or any other law for the time being in force.
ALSO READ- EXECUTION CASE HARYANA RERA PANCHKULA AUTHORITY AGAINST OMAXE
Findings of Court
After giving our thoughtful consideration, to the contentions, advanced by the Counsel for the parties, and the evidence, on record, the commission was of the considered opinion, that the appeal is liable to be partly allowed, for the reasons to be recorded, hereinafter.
Though, it is apparently clear that appellants are deficient in service, by not constructing the units, even after taking initial deposits from respondent No.1. The Commission found that, the District Forum in its order has directed the appellants to refund Rs.92,896/- alongwith 24% interest p.a., which is on higher side, because going by the terms and conditions of allotment of ‘Sahara City Homes’, it is clearly mentioned that the interest of 18% p.a. shall be charged on the delayed payment from the applicants, therefore, The Commission find that interest @ 18% be substituted in place of 24% p.a., as awarded by the District Forum.
Also Read- UT firm to pay Rs 2.07 lakh for unfair trade practices
For the reasons recorded above, the appeal filed by the appellants/Opposite Parties No.1 & 2, is partly accepted. The Appellants are hereunder directed:-
To refund Rs.92,896/- to the Respondent No.1/complainant alongwith interest @ 18% p.a. instead of 24% p.a. from the respective dates of deposit till payment, within 60 days of its receipt;
To pay an amount of Rs.25,000/- to the Respondent No.1/complainant instead of Rs.50,000/-, as consolidated amount of compensation for causing mental agony and harassment on account of deficiency in service To pay litigation expenses to the tune of Rs.15,000/-.
ALSO READ- ASSURED RETURN CONSUMER RERA CASE CHANDIGARH PANCHKULA MOHALI
Conclusion
In conclusion, we can say that, in the present case at hand, even though the decision given by the commission was correct, it gave a penalty which was higher than what should have been given and therefore was changed by the said commission. This shows that the commission does have the power to partially change the judgements given by the lower commissions in cases where they find there to be any discrepancies with respect to the judgement given or penalties levied.
Also Read- COMPLAINT FILED AGAINST SAHARA INDIA PARIVAR IN CONSUMER FORUM
Therefore one can say that in cases where the parties to a dispute are aggrieved or dissatisfied with the holding of the lower commissions then they may appeal to the state consumer dispute Redressal commission so as to sort the said dissatisfaction or aggravations, as the state consumer dispute Redressal commission does have the power to rectify or verify any decision provided by the lower commissions and this power can be exercised in the cases of appeals.
Also Read- Sahara India told to pay 2 city residents Rs10,000 each
This post is written by Aparna Tripathi
For case specific advice, one can contact best/top/expert consumer/Real estate lawyers advocate practicing in District Consumer Forum or State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission of Punjab Haryana Chandigarh.
For more info contact- 99888-17966.
This post covers topics related to consumer court judgements against builders 2020, consumer court decision against builder supreme court judgments on delayed possession 2020, supreme court judgments on delayed possession 2020, supreme court judgement on rera, supreme court judgements against builders, consumer court judgements against builders 2020, supreme court judgement in favour of builders.
