AAR PEE APARTMENTS PVT LTD Vs. NEELAM CHAWLA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) -the present appeal has been filed assailing the order dated 18.10.1999 passed by District Forum, Janak Puri, New Delhi in Complaint Case No.974/98-entitled Mrs. Neelam Chawla V/s. M/s. Aar Pee Apartments Pvt. Ltd. and Another.

(2.) Briefly stated, the relevant facts are that the respondent Smt. Neelam Chawla had filed a complaint before the District Forum on the ground that she had booked a part of building to be constructed by the appellants within one year, on Plot No.6, Janak Puri District Centre, New Delhi and to be handed over to the respondent for the sale price of Rs.1,76,400/-. The respondent had duly paid a sum of Rs.5,000/- vide Receipt No.4779 at the time of booking and another sum of Rs.21,460/- vide receipt No.4799 dated 13.11.1988 as part payment towards the price of the premises booked. As per the agreed terms of booking the respondent was to make payment of 15% of the sale price at the time of booking and thereafter to pay in instalments the balance amount linked with the stages of construction and on receiving call letters from the appellant for the payment of the said instalments. However, the appellants failed to start the construction of the building as assured and also did not send any call letters for payment of instalments. Whenever the respondent approached the appellants, no satisfactory reply was given to the respondent. The construction was started after a delay of 6-7 years and when the respondent contacted the appellants in February, 1998, the building was almost complete and as such the respondent requested the appellants to handover the possession of the same. The appellant however failed to deliver the possession of the booked premises and also failed to give any satisfactory reply and as such the respondent was constrained to file a complaint before the District Forum for the redressal of her grievances.

(3.) As per impugned order, the appellant was duly served by registered post and since the notice was not received back undelivered, service was presumed and the appellant was proceeded ex-parte vide order/proceedings dated 22.12.1998.