Peddeti Pradyosthna vs M/s V. Rattaiah & Co. & 2 Ors

IA/2432/2018 has been filed by the appellant for condoning the delay of 72 days in filing the appeal. In the IA the appellant has stated that she got caught up in the troubles being faced by her parents during rehabilitation process where the doctor advised her parents to take further precautions and support.  Thereafter, the appellant tried looking for an Advocate in Delhi to represent her which took some time. Cause shown is sufficient. IA for condonation of delay in filing the appeal is allowed and delay condoned.

Heard counsel for the parties.

The above appeal has been filed against the Order of State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission dated 21.09.2017 whereby the complaint has been partly allowed and the opposite parties had been directed to refund Rs. 950000/- with cost of Rs. 5000/-.

The complainant stated that opposite parties were company registered under the Companies Act, 1956 and was engaged in the business of development and construction of group housing Project. The opposite parties launched a group housing project in the name of “Divya Sree Shakti Villaggio Le Torri” at Mayuri Nagar, Miyapur, Hyderabad in the year 2012 and made wide publicity of its facilities and amenities. The complainant was believing upon the assurance given by the opposite parties. The complainant booked a Flat and the opposite parties by vide allotment letter dated 16.11.2011 allotted Flat no. 9-401 built up area 1940 sq. ft. subsequently and agreement for sale was executed on 25.01.2012. Schedule 2 of the agreement contended the payment plan under which Rs. 950000/- was payable at the time of agreement and balance amount of Rs. 3800000 was payable at the time of registration of the sale deed. It is not disputed that Rs. 950000/- that was paid by the complainant at the time of agreement. Later on, the complainant wanted certain interior decoration of its own choice and has paid Rs. 150000/- for interior decoration. Thereafter, the opposite parties issued an email dated 4.06.2013 whereby the opposite has demanded balance amount of Flat in the email it has been mentioned that in order to ensure that the interior of your flat are completed in a timely manner and to proceed for registration you are required to make balance amount.  The E-mail was replied by the complaint on 23.08.2013 in which the query regarding procedure of cancellation and the required documents for cancellation reminding it that the complainant has also paid additional amount for flooring and bathroom tiles. The opposite parties replied this email on 23.08.2013 stating that they will required to get signature on the cancellation request letter which has to be submitted to him .The opposite party through email dated 23.08.2013 also admitted the payment of amount for granite and tiles but refused to return this amount. However, without obtaining any cancellation request letter from the complainant, the opposite party by email dated 31.08.2023 cancelled the allotment of the complainant. The complainant by email dated 10.09.2013  asked the opposite parties to hold on the cancellation process, thereafter, the complainant gave legal notice to the opposite parties and file the complaint before State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission. The matter was contested by the opposite parties. The opposite parties have taken plea that the allotment was cancel on the request of the complainant therefore the complaint was not entitled for any interest in terms of the allotment and the certain forfeiture is also attracted.

The State Commission after hearing the parties by the impugned order found that the complainant has made Rs. 950000/- towards advance and Rs. 150000 towards flooring and tiles. However, in terms of the agreement the complainant are bound to make payment of balance amount as complaint has not made the payment of balance amount. Although the opposite parties have not followed the procedure for cancellation therefore the deficiency on the part of the opposite parties. However, the State Commission found as both the parties were at fault therefore the State Commission has directed to refund the amount of Rs. 950000/- alone. Hence, this appeal has been filed by the complainant.

We have considered the arguments of the counsel for the parties and examine the record. The payment of plan as provided in Schedule 2 of the agreement Provides as follows “balance amount to be paid at the time of registration of sale deed”. Meaning thereby the complainant was required to pay balance amount of Rs. 3800000/- when he was called to sign the sale deed at the time of its registration. But a perusal of email of the opposite  parties dated 04.06.2013 shows that the opposite parties has demanded balance amount to ensure completion of the interior in timely manner so that registration be done on time and thereafter the opposite parties wrote under email dated 26.06.2013 in which the opposite parties have stated that over six months’ you have booked the Flat and non-payment of remaining amount before 01.08.2013 will attract the  cancellation of your booking or an interest on the amount as satisfied in the booking form. As per payment plan the balance amount was payable at the time of registration therefore these emails were not in accordance with the agreement and acting upon the email cancellation letter was issued on 31.08.2013. In the circumstances the cancellation was illegal there was no breach of contract on the part of complaint. The Order of State Commission holding the complainant as guilty of committing breach is illegal.

However, at this time since a long time has expired it will be appropriate that the opposite parties may refund the amount deposited by the complainant including the amount of Rs.150000/- for flooring and tiles.

ORDER

In the result, appeal is allowed with cost of Rs. 50000/-. The Order of State Commission is modified and opposite parties is directed to refund the amount of Rs. 950000/- with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of respective deposit and Rs. 150000/- with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the complaint to the complainant within a period of two months.