KULDEEP SINGH Vs. DLF HOMES PANCHKULA PVT. LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a Complaint alleging deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties in having failed to deliver the possession of a plot that had been booked by the Complainant in DLF Valley Panchkula with a booking amount of Rs.12,00,000.00. The Complainant alleges that the total cost of the plot was Rs.1,78,10,452.51 that was to be paid under a two year payment plan. According to the Complainant a receipt was issued for Rs.12,00,00,000.00 on 31/3/2012 followed by a letter acknowledging the booking receipt and allotting the Plot No. DVP - F4/9 Block No. R1 at DLF Valley Panchkula. The same was under a two year payment plan and it also refers to the terms and conditions of the Application Form. The payment chart along with the same demonstrates that the payment was to be made in 11 parts commencing with the booking amount and ending with the offer of possession. The Complainant states that further amounts were paid which is acknowledged by the receipts dtd. 1/2/2013 and 30/4/2013 for different amounts. The last payment according to the Complainant was made on 23/8/2013 which he alleges that was as per the payment plan.

(2.) Learned Counsel for the Complainant submits that the Application form which has been filed by the Opposite Parties as Annexure-OP/1 contains one sided and unilateral terms and conditions but at the same time it categorically records that a Plot Buyer's Agreement had to be executed as envisaged therein. It is clearly averred that the Opposite Parties were to dispatch the Plot Buyer's Agreement which had to be executed and returned within 30 days or else that would invite forfeiture and other consequences. It is also urged that the agreement was understood to be binding and it is for this reason that the terms and conditions also referred to the Plot Buyer's Agreement (PBA). It has been pointed out that this fact has also been stated in Clause 8 of the said agreement that envisages forfeiture.

(3.) It is the contention of the Complainant that no agreement was either offered or sent and therefore this was the first deficiency that was noticed by the Complainant. The Opposite Parties never furnished the said performa of the Plot Buyer's Agreement as promised and the reason for the same was for that the Opposite Parties were deceitly planning to deprive the Complainant of a valid transaction after completing all legal formalities that was required to be done keeping in view the various legal provisions that had not been fulfilled by the Opposite Parties. The development also had not been carried out timely. It was on account of such deficiencies that the Opposite Parties failed to execute the Plot Buyer's Agreement and then surreptitiously proceeded to cancel the plot on 18/11/2014. Learned Counsel submit that this cancellation is also not a valid document as it recites the cancellation of the Property Buyer Agreement which was never executed. In the absence of any such agreement there was no occasion for the Opposite Party to have invoked the forfeiture clause as it is the Opposite Parties who have defaulted by not executing the agreement.