SAHARA INDIA PARIVAR Vs. RAJINDER KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been filed under section 19 read with section 21(a)(ii) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the impugned order dated 29.05.2015, passed by the Rajasthan State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (hereinafter referred to as 'the State Commission') in Consumer Complaint No. CC/74/2012, vide which, the said complaint was allowed and the appellants/opposite parties (OPs) were directed to allot and handover the possession of house C-1/201, Sahara City Homes, Jaipur to the respondent/complainant within three months from the date of passing the order. The appellants/OPs were also directed to pay a sum of Rs.1 lakh as damages against mental agony etc. to the complainant and Rs.10,000/- as cost of litigation.

(2.) Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the respondent/complainant Rajinder Kumar booked a house with the appellants/OPs bearing C-1/201 measuring 116.11 sq. mtr. in the proposed Sahara City Project at a tentative cost of Rs.23.12 lakh. The complainant paid a total sum of Rs.3,46,890/- to the OPs by means of instalments paid on different dates. The said booking was made in response to an advertisement given by the appellants/OPs in the newspaper "Punjab Kesari" Rohtak. As per the terms and conditions of the scheme, 5% of the total cost of the house was to be deposited at the time of booking and 10% of the cost was to be paid in 24 instalments of Rs.9,635/- each. The balance 85% of the amount could be paid as per 3 different options listed in the scheme. It has been alleged that after the deposit of 15% of the money with the appellants/OPs, no further communication was received from them, neither possession of the property was offered in spite of repeated requests and visits to them. It was also alleged that the OPs failed to construct the said unit within the time as promised in the agreement letter and hence, failed to deliver the actual physical possession within the stipulated period. The complainant filed the consumer complaint in question, seeking directions to the appellants/OPs to hand over the physical possession of the unit in question, to the complainant and also to pay interest on the amount deposited @18% p.a. from the date of deposit till the date of handing over the actual physical possession and also to pay a sum of Rs.1 lakh as compensation against mental agony and Rs.11,000/- as cost of litigation.

(3.) The complaint was resisted by the appellants/OPs by filing a written reply before the State Commission in which they stated that the complaint was not maintainable, as the matter was to be referred for arbitration in view of the terms and conditions of the booking. There was no deficiency in service on their part in any manner. Moreover, intricate question of facts and law could only be adjudicated by a Civil Court of competent jurisdiction. Further, as per clause 14(iii) of the agreement, in the wake of any unforeseen/unavoidable reason or circumstances, the appellants/OPs were required to refund the amount deposited by the complainant alongwith opportunity loss of 5% to 12.5% of the booking advance only.