New Delhi -°C
Today in New Delhi, India

Jun 01, 2020-Monday
-°C

Humidity
-

Wind
-

Select city

Metro cities - Delhi, Mumbai, Chennai, Kolkata

Other cities - Noida, Gurgaon, Bengaluru, Hyderabad, Bhopal , Chandigarh , Dehradun, Indore, Jaipur, Lucknow, Patna, Ranchi

ADVERTISEMENT
Home / Chandigarh / Consumer forum directs housing company to refund ₹5.25 lakh to Zirakpur brothers

Consumer forum directs housing company to refund ₹5.25 lakh to Zirakpur brothers

The company and two directors in their written statement pleaded that the complainants are “Speculative buyers and claimed the refund on account of prevalent property prices which have come down.”

chandigarh Updated: May 21, 2020 23:43 IST
HT Correspondent
HT Correspondent
Forum directed the opposite parties to jointly refund ₹5.25 lakh along @9% interest per annum from the respective dates of deposit, till its realisation
Forum directed the opposite parties to jointly refund ₹5.25 lakh along @9% interest per annum from the respective dates of deposit, till its realisation(HT FILE)

The district consumer disputes redressal forum has directed M/s BCL Homes Limited, Dariya, Chandigarh, and three directors to refund ₹5.25 lakh and pay ₹ 50,000 as compensation to two Zirakpur residents for deficiency in service.

Ratnish Garg and his brother Munish filed a complaint stating that they jointly booked two three-bedrooms flats with the company (opposite parties) in their upcoming project, Chinar Homes, at Kishanpura, Zirakpur, in March 2013.

The brothers said they paid ₹5.25 lakh and the company issued them a letter stating that they were eligible for 12 draws for allotment of flats over a period of a year.

“It was also mentioned that if we were not successful in any of the monthly draws, the registration amount would be refunded after a year with 15% interest. But, the opposite parties (the company) failed to fulfil their promise despite repeated requests and personal entreaties,” the brothers told the court, adding that it amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice.

The company and two directors in their written statement pleaded that the complainants are “Speculative buyers and claimed the refund on account of prevalent property prices which have come down.”

They added that the possession of the fully developed project could not be offered on account of force majeure conditions which were beyond the control of the opposite parties.

The forum observed: “The opposite parties have the complainants’ money for a long time and have failed to redress their grievances. Neither of the opposite parties have refunded the money or offered possession till date. Hence they are liable to pay back the amount deposited.”

It directed the company and three directors to jointly refund ₹5.25 lakh along @9% interest per annum from the respective dates of deposit, till its realisation; and to pay ₹50,000 on account of deficiency in service and causing mental and physical harassment to the complainants; and ₹10,000 as litigation cost.

ht epaper

Sign In to continue reading