A P SINGH Vs. PARAMJIT KAUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) -THIS judgment will dispose of First Appeal No. 851 of 2006, A. P. Singh v. Paramjit Kaur and First Appeal No. 164 of 2007, Paramjit Kaur Narula v. A. P. Singh. Both these appeals are directed against the same judgment dated 15. 5. 2006 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Ropar (in short 'district Forum' ). The parties are the same in both the appeals. For the sake of convenience, the facts are taken from First Appeal No. 851 of 2006. The parties would also be referred as per their status in the said appeal.

(2.) PARAMJIT Kaur Narula (in short 'complainant'), after migration from Assam, was in search of a house in Mohali. She contacted A. P. Singh, Proprietor of M/s. A. P. Traders (in short 'appellant') who was a builder of repute. The appellant agreed to build a house for the complainant over two plots measuring 110 sq. yds. and 68 sq. yards situated at Swaraj Nagar, Kharar as both these plots were adjoining each other. The proposed house consisted of one Drawing Room, two Bed Rooms, one Kitchen and one Toilet and a car porch complete with amenities over the plot measuring 110 sq. yds. and one Bed Room with attached toilet and one small store on the plot of 68 sq. yds. The value of the entire house payable by the complainant to the appellant was fixed at Rs. 6,50,000. The parties entered into an agreement on 16. 12. 2003 and the complainant made the payment of Rs. 90,000 as advance money vide two separate cheques of Rs. 48,000 and Rs. 40,000. Rs. 2,000 were paid in cash. The last date for full and final payment was fixed as 31. 3. 2004. The possession of the house was also to be delivered by the appellant to the complainant on that date and the sale deed was also to be executed on the same day. However, the stipulated date expired without any result.

(3.) THE appellant again received a sum of Rs. 1 lac through cheque for which the appellant executed an affidavit on 7. 6. 2004 in which it was agreed that the possession of the house will be delivered by the appellant to the complainant on 27. 7. 2004 and the Sale Deed will also be executed on the same date. Then appellant failed to deliver the possession of the house as it was not built. Therefore, another agreement was executed between the parties on 29. 7. 2004 in which it was mentioned by which time the appellant had received a sum of Rs. 2,80,000 and the date of execution of the Sale Deed was fixed as 29. 9. 2004 and the remaining amount was payable by the complainant to the appellant on that date. The expenses of the registered Sale Deed were to be borne by the complainant. The complainant was also authorised to get the Sale Deed executed in her name or in the name of any other person. She was also entitled to get the double amount from the appellant, if he failed to execute the Sale Deed but if the complainant backed out, then the amount of Rs. 2,80,000 was to stand forfeited. The appellant was to get a house on rent for the complainant till he delivered the possession of a built house. The appellant also executed separate receipt for Rs. 2,80,000 in favour of the complainant.