BINDIYA SAHI Vs. RAHEJA DEVELOPERS LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been filed by the appellant challenging the order dated 18.05.2016 of the Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Delhi ('the State Commission') in CC no. 413 of 2016.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that the appellant no.1/ complainant no.1 paid money to the respondent to start a small shop for her earning. The total cost of the shop was Rs.78,84,584/-. The complainant booked a commercial space in Gurugram and paid Rs.6,73,980/- on 31.01.2014. On 16.04.2014 and 31.07.2014, the complainant paid Rs.10,10,970/- and 4,15,896/- respectively. The total amount paid by the complainant was Rs.21,00,846/-. On receiving the part payment from the complainant, the respondent started playing all kinds of pressure techniques upon the complainants and even made illegal demands for money and has also doubled the PLC charges from 5% to 10% and kept on changing the size and location of the shop, just to harass the complainant. Due to undue pressure and coercion of the respondent, the complainant agreed for the allotment of a different shop. Agreement to sale was signed on 01.08.2014. In the month of March 2015, the respondent raised a demand of Rs.10,00,000/- to be paid in cash. As the financial position of the complainant was not good to pay such huge amount in cash, the complainant expressed her inability to pay the same. The respondent threatened to cancel the allotment and not to refund a single penny. Ultimately, under undue pressure the complainant agreed to take back whatever money the respondent was offering to the appellant. The compalinant wrote a letter regarding the same but the respondent did not pay a single penny to the complainant. Hence, a consumer complaint was filed before the State Commission. The consumer complaint was dismissed by the State Commission vide its order dated 18th May 2016.

(3.) Heard the learned counsel for both the parties and perused the record. The learned counsel for the appellant stated that the State Commission has dismissed the complaint on frivolous grounds. The State Commission has observed that the complainants are not 'consumer' as the shop is located in a Commercial Complex and therefore, the same was booked for commercial purpose. There is no averment in the complaint that the shop was purchased for earning livelihood by means of self-employment. The second point on which the complaint has been dismissed is that the State Commission observed that it was not possible for the complainant to come from Delhi to Gurugram and to operate the shop on a daily basis. The third point on which State Commission has not accepted the complaint is that the complainants have not shown the source of income for purchasing the shop. The learned counsel for the appellant argued that first of all, the observation of the State Commission that the complainants would not be able to come from Delhi to operate the shop at Gurugram on a daily basis is totally irrelevant as there was no such condition for the allotment of shop that only persons living in Gurugram had to apply for the same. Moreover, it is quite possible to operate the shop after coming from Delhi even on a daily basis. This depends on the complainants as to how they manage to operate the shop. Coming to the question of funds, learned counsel stated that the complainant no.1 has taken the funds from her husband who is complainant no.2 and there is no illegality in this transaction. On the question of complainants being consumers, it was stated by the learned counsel for the appellants that the shop was purchased for earning livelihood for complainant no.1 by means of self-employment and therefore, the complainants satisfied the criteria under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 for being consumers. The State Commission has also found the complaint as premature as the same was filed before the due date of possession. In this regard, the learned counsel stated that this observation could have been valid, had the complainants been planning to take the possession of the said shop. As the complaint has been filed for refund of the paid amount, this request can be made at any time after depositing the amount and there is no need to wait for the date of due possession for filing the complaint.