Consumer court case filed RPS Rhythm

[nipungoyal]

I have filed a consumer case against RPS . If anybody is interested to please call me at 9xxxxxxxxx.

Regards
Nipun Goyal

[nipungoyal]

To,

RPS Infrastructure Ltd.,
1117-1120,
11th Floor, Tower B,
DLF Towers,
Jasola District Center,
New Delhi- 110025


Reg.: Your Letter dated 15.06.2012 regarding refund of deposit amount in respect of Unit No. in Tower No. , RPS-Rhythm, Sector-88, Faridabad.

Sir/Madam,

In reference to your letter dated 15.06.2012 regarding refund of deposit amount in respect of my booked Unit No.MY-18-0708 in Tower No. Melody-18, RPS-Rhythm, Sector-88, Faridabad, I do not agree with stand of the Company that due to ‘force majeure reasons’ construction activities could not be carried forward and had to be put on hold. Rather, there are no force majeure reasons for discontinuing the construction activities but the Company has falsely & with malafide intentions has stated ‘force majeure reasons’, without giving details of force majeure reason, in order to avoid the liability of payment of interest on deposited amount of the allottees/buyers of flats due to inability of RPS Infrastructure Limited to construct the booked flats. What to say about construction of flats, the company did not even started the excavation work of its much hyped ‘RPS-Rhythm’ Project at Faridabad, as such; there cannot be any fore majeure reason to put the construction on hold. Moreover, the company has not intentionally disclosed the force majeure reasons

It is informed that the Company failed to carryout excavation work and construction activities, for construction of booked flats in ‘RPS-Rhythm’ Project and there was/is no force majeure reasons affecting construction work, rather failure of the Project has been given the colors of ‘force majeure reasons’ for abandoning the project.

I hereby request and demand that my deposited amount in respect of aforesaid booked flat along with interest at the rate of 24 per cent per annum from the date of deposit till payment be paid at the earliest, as the company has failed to construct the flat without there being any alleged force majeure reason.

Thanking You,

[nipungoyal]

RPS is planning to construct a new project on Rhythm site at higher cost . They are trying to clear dues of all existing Rhythm , so that they can proceed with there future plans . Let us be be patience and wait for negotitation

[nipungoyal]

See I told RPS is going for new project in same area as rtythm . Poor people invested for 4 years and got betrayed by builder

[rakesh_py]

What was the outcomes on your Consumer court case filed for RPS Rhythm?
Since RPS have new project launch on Rhythm site - do we need to file new court case on RPS?

[sirohionline]

CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-VII
GOVT. OF N.C.T. OF DELHI
LOCAL SHOPPING COMPLEX, SHEIKH SARAI, NEW DELHI-110017

Complaint No. DF. VII/01/12 Dated :

In the matter of :
Manoj Kumar Jha,
S/o Bedadhar Jha,
1690-A, HBC, Sec-29,
Faridabad-121008 …Complainant

Versus

M/s RPS Infrastructure Ltd.,
1117-1120, 11th Floor, Tower-B,
DLF Towers, Jasola District Center,
New Delhi-110025 …Opposite Party

O R D E R

(HARSHALI KAUR, MEMBER)

Aggrieved from the cancellation of booking of unit in RPS Palm, Sector 88, Greater Faridabad, Haryana by the OP having their Head office at Jasola, District Centre, New Delhi, the complainant filed this complaint Under Section 12, of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 on 02.01.12 alleging Unfair Trade Practice adopted by OP and committing deficiency in service. He, thereby prayed for directions to the OP to restore his right in the booked unit giving him discount of Rs. 50,000/- plus 5% discount in lieu of the direct booking as promised and also give to him interest on the amount of Rs. 6 ,59,137/- retained by the OP against his booking up to 02.11.09 at the rate mentioned in the Brochure without any deduction or in the alternative to refund him sum of Rs.8,59,137/- along with interest at the rate 18% and 24% being charged by the OP from their customer w.e.f the date of first booking with them and also to award cost of Rs.2,00,000/- for causing the complainant Mental Agony along with Rs. 30,000/- as legal expenses.

Notice of the complaint was sent to the OP who filed their reply and contested the complaint denying any deficiency in service on their part alleging that it is the complainant who defaulted in making the payment towards the cost of the booked unit despite having been issued various demand Notices/Reminders dated 01.02.10, 19.07.10, 13.09.10 and hence OP were left with no option but to cancel the booking vide letter dated 14.03.11, as a result of which they are entitled to forfeit the deposited amount of Rs.2,00,000/- as per agreed Terms and Conditions of booking. However, instead of doing so, as a special favour and goodwill gesture, they offered to the complainant to refund the entire booking amount subject to complainant's surrendering the requisite documents. The complainant, however, did not accept the offer, which was even repeated before the Mediation Centre, where also the complainant did not agree to complete the process of cancellation and merger of his earlier booked unit in their RPS - Rhythm Project. It is also stated by the OP that despite the complainant's failure to comply with the offer, OP have carried out the activities in their project by investing more money than the amount paid by the complainant in the construction of this booked unit in RPS - Palm. They have categorically denied having indulged in any Unfair Trade Practice or there being any deficiency in service on their part.

Admitted facts, of this case, briefly stated, are that the complainant booked a flat in the upcoming project of the OP known as RPS - Rhythm by submitting application dated 08.07.08. The unit comprised of two plus one BHK and the complainant paid a sum of Rs. 2,50,000/- at the time of booking and thereafter another sum of Rs. 4,09,137.50 paise as demanded by the OP, was deposited by the complainant. Acknowledgement receipt of the payment in favour of the complainant were also issued by the OP, who since could not initiate the work under the said project till 24.09.09, the complainant asked them to book unit/flat in their newly launched Project named RPS - Palm by adjusting the amount of Rs. 6 ,59,137/- paid by him for the unit under RPS - Rhythm Project. The complainant was offered a discount also on the newly booked unit.

Accordingly, the complainant deposited a sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- as per demand of the OP for the unit in the RPS Palm Project and asked the complainant to return all original receipt of deposits of Rs. 6,59,137/- in respect of his booking of the unit in the RPS - Rhythm Project. It is alleged by the complainant the OP instead of adjusting already paid/invested amount under the RPS - Rhythm Project raised a further demand of Rs. 3,49,000/- vide letter dated 22.01.2010 and thereafter asked for undertaking and cancellation letter in the prescribed format to process the request for merger vide their letter dated 12.02.10. The complainant claims that he had not been issued the original receipt in respect to RPS-Palm regarding the adjustment of Rs. 6,59,137/- which had been retained by the OP who on the contrary informed the complainant that the process of merger could not take place due to non-submission of merger request in the prescribed format and therefore amount of Rs. 6,59,137/- could not be adjusted towards the unit booked in RPS Palm Project and confirmed asking for balance of Rs. 6,39,955/- towards the cost of the unit under the RPS - Palm Project. According to the complainant, he had already completed the formalities for merger by submitting original receipts of payment under RPS - Rhythm and executed merger set but with some alterations. He has thus, claimed, that after adjusting the amount of Rs. 6,59,137/- there was outstanding of Rs. 19,582/- towards the cost of unit under the RPS - Palm Project but the OP cancelled his booking under that Project which is tantamount to Unfair Trade Practice as well as deficiency in service.

Conversely the case of the OP is that the complainant initially submitted application for booking of unit in the project RPS - Rhythm in joint name of himself and Ms. Kishori Jha but later on he got deleted the name of Ms. Kishori Jha and applied afresh, through the commission Agent M/s Shikher Associates as his dealer whom the OP had to pay the commission against the booking by the complainant. He was allowed to book and another unit in the project RPS - Palm against which the complainant deposited Rs. 2,00,000/- on 02.11.09, as against the required amount of Rs.3,00,000/- by submitting an application form/booking form. He was also allowed transfer of his deposit amount of the earlier unit without any deduction but the complainant repeatedly insisted for more discount on the ground that he had approached the OP directly without any dealer. The complainant while insisting on discount did not even surrender the original documents/receipts of payments towards unit in RPS - Rhythm. He only returned photocopies of the receipt's and also made atlerations in the format for merger of his booked unit under the project Rhythm with the unit under Project - Palm. They have submitted that unless the process of cancellation of his unit in Project - Rhythm was completed by following prescribed procedure, deposited amount for the same could not be transferred to the other unit and despite repeated requests and reminders when the complainant failed to comply with the prescribed procedure, the amount of Rs. 6,59,137/- could not be transferred against the booking of unit in the Palm's Project.
It is however admitted that Rs. 6,59,137/- was still lying with them against the booking in RPS - Rhythm.

After the pleadings were complete; we heard the Ld. Counsel for the parties and perused the material on record.

After a careful perusal of the pleadings, the affidavit's submitted by way of evidence by the respective parties, we find that the complainant admittedly paid a sum of Rs. 8,59,137/- to the OP's which are lying with them till date towards booking of two units; one in project RPS - Rhythm and other in RPS - Palm.

According to the OP's the complainant was liable to pay the balance of Rs. 6,39,955/- towards cost of unit under the Palm Project because they have received only Rs. 2,00,000/- as against the cost of said unit, despite admitting that Rs. 6,59,137/ -for the unit under the other project i.e. Rhythm was still lying with them, which could not be adjusted in favour of the complainant due to non-compliance by him to furnish the requisite documents for cancellations of this unit under the project RPS - Rhythm. Though, it is claimed by the complainant that he had submitted the original receipts along with the merger request in the format provided to him by the OP yet admits that he did some alterations in the format. The OP have denied the receipt of original receipts of the payment of Rs. 6,59,137/- despite acknowledging the fact that this amount had been deposited by the complainant and the same is still lying with them. Their insistence therefore, for surrendering the original receipts appears to us, unreasonable. However, we agree with the OP that request for merger in the prescribed format is required to be submitted by the complainant to claim adjustment of the amount deposited against the RPS - Rhythm Project.

The allotment has already been cancelled by the OP vide letter dated 14.03.11, therefore the only relief which can be provided to the complainant in this case would be refund of fees deposited amount lying with the OP since the date of deposit. As a result of our above discussion we, therefore, allow the complaint and direct the OP to refund to the complainant a sum of Rs.8,59,137/- with interest from date of filing the complaint i.e. 02.01.12 till realization at the rate of 12% per annum. No order as to compensation and cost of litigation because the interest awarded shall adequately meet the ends of justice.

Order be complied within 30 days of the receipt of the copy of the order.

• Copy of order be supplied to the parties free of cost.
• File, thereafter, be consigned to Record Room.


Order Pronounced on May, 2014



(HARSHALI KAUR) (S.K.SARVARIA)
MEMBER PRESIDENT
*B.S.*

[anjali]

can this order be used by other buyers of RPS Palms too, my sister booked a flat and then left for UK, till then RPS did not give her any clarity and then issued the letter saying her booking may get cancelled if she doesn't pay her dues beyond the initial unit booking amount

do please confirm

Anjali
9818231938

[anuj]

@Anjali: I am curious to know how come people are still enrolling in new projects from RPS as this builder is having a very bad image in the market. He is not even able to handover Savana customers and the news is out in market. Projects like RPS Rhythm should not have even a single booking to teach this corrupt builder a lesson.
RPS is just a ashamed builder that now they are asking some illegal demands for Savana which has no base. Please help spreading this word as no further people should come in his trap.

[anirav]

We need to get organised and collectively take on RPS. can anyone take the responsibility. Perhaps pressure thru a website/ facebook page may help. Thanx

[aksh2006]

@Anjali: I am curious to know how come people are still enrolling in new projects from RPS as this builder is having a very bad image in the market. He is not even able to handover Savana customers and the news is out in market. Projects like RPS Rhythm should not have even a single booking to teach this corrupt builder a lesson.
RPS is just a ashamed builder that now they are asking some illegal demands for Savana which has no base. Please help spreading this word as no further people should come in his trap.

RPS is highly profiled cheater i had booked the flat in 2008 at RPS Reythm and i raised the file against them in state commission consumer cell.
If any one interested than contact. 9416854669, +77758253412 Whatsapp number +77758253412
anil_mas76@yahoo.com

[aksh2006]

To,

RPS Infrastructure Ltd.,
1117-1120,
11th Floor, Tower B,
DLF Towers,
Jasola District Center,
New Delhi- 110025


Reg.: Your Letter dated 15.06.2012 regarding refund of deposit amount in respect of Unit No. in Tower No. , RPS-Rhythm, Sector-88, Faridabad.

Sir/Madam,

In reference to your letter dated 15.06.2012 regarding refund of deposit amount in respect of my booked Unit No.MY-18-0708 in Tower No. Melody-18, RPS-Rhythm, Sector-88, Faridabad, I do not agree with stand of the Company that due to ‘force majeure reasons’ construction activities could not be carried forward and had to be put on hold. Rather, there are no force majeure reasons for discontinuing the construction activities but the Company has falsely & with malafide intentions has stated ‘force majeure reasons’, without giving details of force majeure reason, in order to avoid the liability of payment of interest on deposited amount of the allottees/buyers of flats due to inability of RPS Infrastructure Limited to construct the booked flats. What to say about construction of flats, the company did not even started the excavation work of its much hyped ‘RPS-Rhythm’ Project at Faridabad, as such; there cannot be any fore majeure reason to put the construction on hold. Moreover, the company has not intentionally disclosed the force majeure reasons

It is informed that the Company failed to carryout excavation work and construction activities, for construction of booked flats in ‘RPS-Rhythm’ Project and there was/is no force majeure reasons affecting construction work, rather failure of the Project has been given the colors of ‘force majeure reasons’ for abandoning the project.

I hereby request and demand that my deposited amount in respect of aforesaid booked flat along with interest at the rate of 24 per cent per annum from the date of deposit till payment be paid at the earliest, as the company has failed to construct the flat without there being any alleged force majeure reason.

Thanking You,

Here also same thing and RPS is highly profiled cheater i raised the case against them in higher consumer state commission.

Before the Hon. President and his Companion the Distt. Consumer Forum Faridabad, Sector- 12, Faridabad (Haryana)


In the matter of: Consumer Complaint No: - of 2014
Anil Kumar
S/o Sh. Ishwar Singh
H.No. 560, Sector 21/C
Faridabad-121002((HR)
Mob. 09050003012,9416854669
Complainant

V/s
M/s RPS Infrastructure Limited
1117-1120, 11th Floor Tower- B
DLF Towers, Jasola District Center
New Delhi 110025
Tel.011-40543200 Respondant/Opposite Party
(Through its MD/Director)
P.S. Surajkund, Faridabad


Sub: Complaint U/s 12 of C.P.A 1986 as per aggrieved from the Respondant/Opposite Party.
Ref: U/s 2(1) of (g)/ (o)/ (nnn)/(r) and s/s(x) of (r) of the Act against M/s RPS Group.

May it please your Honor.
Most Respectfully Showeth,
1. That I, Anil Kumar S/o Sh. Ishwar Singh age about 45 years is residing on Rent in H.No. 560, Sector 21/C, Faridabad (HR). The Complainant is working as a Sr. Electrical Engineer in KSS Group at Kazakhstan. (A copy of Residential Proof as a Rent Agreement with the Land Lord Sh. Jagdish Singh is herewith annexed at Page 1/C).
2. That the Complainant visited the site office at Sector 88, Faridabad where he was lured by the Opposite Party to Book a Flat with RPS Group. Further, Complainant was assured that they would be provided best Loan facility /Quality Services/Timely handing over the Possession of the Flat.
3. That the Complainant who is residing on Rent was in dire need of an Accommodation preferred to book a 2+1 BHK Unit Flat with RPS Group on 7/7/2008 in the Project RHYTHM situated at RPS City, Sector-88, Greater Faridabad (HR).
The details of the Unit/Flat are as under:-
I. Flat area 1395SQFT (2+IBHK)
II. Tower No. MELODY-20
III. Unit Flat No. 0803 (8th Floor)
IV. Project RHYTHM
The Complainant got the Allotment order on 9/9/2008 being Priorty No. P-0445 in Project RHYTHM. A copy of the same is herewith annexed at page 2/c containing in Annex-2/C.
4. That the Complainant Anil Kumar paid an amount of Rs. 2,50,000/-(Two Lac Fifty Thousand Only) vide Cheque no 846494 dated 07.08.2008 drawn on Canara Bank, New Delhi on account of Booking amount is RHYTHM sector-88, Faridabad.(A copy of same is herewith annexed at page 3/C). Accordingly, a Receipt No. 14703 dated 14/8/2008 had been issued to the Complainant.
5. That on further Demand from Respondent, the Complainant had further paid a sum of Rs. 4, 09,137.50(Four Lac Nine Thousand One Hundred Thirty Seven and Paisa Fifty Only) through Cheque no. 00779 dated 22/9/2008 drawn on PNB, Delhi against the Installment due for allotment in Tower MELODY-20 Unit No. 803, RPS City Faridabad (A copy of same is herewith annexed at page 4/C).
6. That the DGM (Commercial), Sh. Rajesh Jain, on behalf of RPS Group intimated to the Complainant vide its Letter dated 12/4/2010 that the Construction work of the RHYTHM has already been commenced after Completion of Primary activities and the Complainant would get another Payment Demand Letter very shortly. (A Copy of the same is herewith annexed at page 5/C).
7. That the Complainant got a Demanded Letter on 7.05.2010 stating that an installment of Rs. 3, 82, 2, 30/-(Three Lac Eighty Two Thousand Two Hundred Thirty Only) may be deposited with the Developer within 15 days after Receipt of this Notice. Further, the Complainant was advised that Finance facility were also available with them. (A copy of the same is herewith annexed at page 6/C). The Respondent and Complainant had executed an Apartment. Buyer’s Agreement on 15.05.2010 at Registered Office of the Respondent. (A copy of the same is herewith annexed at page 7/C).
8. That the Complainant, after receiving Demand and Notice on 7.05.2010 contacted M/s HDFC for sanctioning of a House Loan. The Respondent (RPS Group) had confirmed in writing to HDFC Banking vide its Letter dt. 16.08.2010 stated that they had obtained Necessary Permission/Approvals, Sanctions for construction of the said Unit from Govt. Authorities. Further, the Respondent had given undertaking that the construction of the Building as well as Flats shall be in accordance with the Approved Plan. (A copy of the same is herewith annexed at page 8/C).
9. That a Housing Loan was sanctioned by HDFC and a Tripartite Agreement had been executed among the Complainant-Respondent and HDFC on 16.08.2010 vide which a total advance of Rs. 13,00000/-(Thirteen Lac) had been sanctioned by HDFC in favor of the Complainant. (A copy of the same is herewith annexed at page 9/C).
10. That on receiving the Demand Letter, the Complainant preferred to visit the Site and had enquired the factual Position. The Complainant found that there construction activities had been also started. The Officials present in the Site Office ensured the Complainant that the Activities would be commenced very soon and you may pay the amount when the construction Activities have to start in fact.
11. That the Complainant again visited the Site. The Complainant was asked to deposit the amount of Demand Notice. The Respondent assured the Complainant that construction would be commenced very soon. The Complainant trusted upon the Respondent. As it had already been decided that the Respondent would accept the delayed payment, when the work would be commenced in actual. The Complainant requested the Respondent vide its Letter dated 5.03.2012. (A copy of the same is herewith annexed at page 10/C). The Respondent accepted the request of the Complainant and had also confirmed that they got a total sum of Rs. 6, 59,1,37.50 (Six Lac Fifty Nine Thousand One Hundred Thirty Seven and Paisa Fifty Only). Further, the Respondent had confirmed that they would not to charge any interest for delayed payment against the said Demand Notice till the restart of work at site would be started and it will be intimated to the customers. The Respondent had also assured that all Necessary steps are being taken up by the Respondent for its Solution to restart of the work at site. (A copy of the same is herewith annexed at page 11/C).
12. That the Respondent had written a letter on 15.06.2012 to the Complainant that due to certain “force Majeure reasons” which were beyond their control, the construction activities could not be started and it had “put to hold”. Further, the Respondent advised the Complainant that he may submit documents related to his allotted Unit in Original for enabling them to process the refund of his deposit. The Respondent had also been given an option to allot him an alternate option for booking in other ongoing Projects at discounted Rates. (A copy of the same is herewith annexed at page 12/C).
13. That after receiving the Letter from Respondent, the Complainant came to the Office of Respondent. The Complainant has written a letter addressed to RPS Group on 28.06.2012 in the office of the Respondent and asked the following queries:-
a) What is the Present cost of flat in these ongoing Projects?
b) What would be Final Value of his deposit (Rs. 6,59,1,37.50+1,00,000=7,59,1,37.50). The Respondent had issued a receipt of Rs. 6, 59,1,37.50 and a sum of Rs. 1, 00,000/-(One Lac Only) had been taken as a Premium in cash from the Complainant and no Receipt was given to him?
c) What would be the extra amount he has to pay in case he thinks to take the flats in other ongoing Project?
d) What would be the Concession/Discount which would be given to the Complainant?
e) What are the reasons for cancelation of the Present Booking in Unit no. 803, RHYTHM in RPS Group? (A copy of the same is herewith annexed at page 12/C).
14. That the Complainant had tried its best that he may be allotted his Original Flat but the Respondent being a Developer/Builder did not allot the Flat no. 803. The Office Staff Members are also treating the Complainant that in case he had a created a scene and make Halla-Gulla then he has to face dire consequences.
15. That Complainant served a Legal Notice on 29.09.2013 through his Counsel addressed to DGM (Commercial) and RPS (Infra. Ltd.) through Regd./AD. (A copy of the same is herewith annexed at page 13/C). But one Regd. Letter addressed to the DGM (Commercial returned to the Counsel of the Complainant. (The Original returned Letter is herewith annexed at page 14/C). The Counsel of the Complainant sent another Reminder on 15.02.2014 addressed to Director, RPS Group, New Delhi. (A copy of the same is herewith annexed at page 15/C) vide Postal receipt no ARH0235889024 IN dated 15.02.2104. (An Original Postal Receipt is herewith annexed at page 16/C).
16. That the Respondent has neither replied the Notice nor has he allotted the Flat in spite of sending two Notices.
17. That it has come into the knowledge of the Complainant that the Developer/Respondent has misleaded and misinformed the Complainant. The Respondent very cleverly and cunningly, had advised the Complainant that due to delay in execution work on such particular unit which is suspended and it would be interest of the Complainant that the Original Agreement which had been executed on 15.05.2010 at New Delhi may be returned to them so that their Original booking amount may be refunded to him. This Mala-trade practices and cheating offer to the Complainant is in the contrary as per the site visit made by the Complainant on various occasion as well as terms & conditions mentioned in the Agreement. While offering this offer, its smells that the company wants to take the Benefits of clause 30 through adopting and incorporated in the agreement which is against the interests of the Complainant.
18. That further the Complainant has been intimated vide letter dated 15.06.2012 that the company has offered to give him an alternate option and come forward for booking in its another ongoing in other Tower/Project at a discounted rates where are the construction activities are going on in full swings. In fact, this offer is quite vague, incomplete and required further clarification. This offer is against the mutual trust and against in terms of the conditions contained in agreement. Further this offer of the company is a Breach of mutual trust, mala trade practice, cheating, fraud and highly deficiency in the services. It is to intimate that the Complainant had booked the flat in 2008. The Complainant has already paid 25% Payment of this Unit. Now after gap of 4 years the Complainant has been offered to accept the offer of a flat in another Unit. It means that the Complainant has to wait for another 4-5 years to complete the New Unit and my client expects that after 4-5 years when this unit would be ready then the Complainant would be to offered to book another flat in other unit which is ongoing and this process would be continued till his death and the Complainant would never get the Possession of any Residential Flat in RPS Group. Further, this allotted unit has already been Mortgaged with the HDFC and this unit already been finance of Rs.13, 00,000/- and it is not possible to change this unit with some other unit.
19. That the Complainant has information that due to Price-escalation, the company is adopting this type of mala trade practices so that new Intending Buyers may purchase the completed units on the present higher prices and those fake persons, who had already booked the flats may be lured by adopting this type of practices and the Developer may earn the profit by adopting this type of Mala-trade practice.
20. That after booking the flat in RPS Group till date, the Complainant had never been informed or intimated about the “force majeure” and hurdles created by the land owners in any projects. Now this unit is going too completed and is ready to take the possession, the Complainant is informed that this may unit get delayed due to above reasons.
21. That as per clause no.48 of the agreement, it has been taken the confirmation from the Intending Buyers by the “Developer” that the buyer is the fully aware of the provision of the “Haryana Apartment Owner Ship Act 1983”. In fact, most of the buyers are the tenants and they are not aware of any laws, innocent and on mutual trust, they signed on the agreement. Whenever any Developer or a Dealer shows them this type of tainted picture, future flowering dreams about their projects in house decorated flats they use to become hunted targets of this type of practices and they do not understand the legal terminology, clauses which have been inserted in the agreement. Whenever, any dispute is raised, these legal terminology and clauses do not help them to redress their grievances and suffered. The Complainant has also become the victim of this target.
22. That the Complainant has never been informed as per clause of agreement bearing no.67 whether the “Developer” has created any charge on the ongoing project where in the Complainant had booked a flat in the unit. In case, if any charge has been created by the Developer from any FI’s and Banks it has to be cleared before handing over the flats to him.
23. That as per clause 47 mentioned in the agreement that in case any dispute has been arisen out or touching upon or in relation to the terms of the said agreement including the interpretation and validity of the terms and condition thereof. Then it has to be settled down through amicably. In fact, there is no dispute and neither has it required any interpretation but it is matter of cheating, mala trade practice and Breach of trust as well as deficiency in services.
Submission:
The Complainant submits before than Hon’ble Court as following further in his Interest:-
1. That the Complainant has suffered a Huge Financial Loss due to price-escalation and he has to pay High Rent to the Land Lord.
2. That the Complainant has suffered mentally, physically either to follow-up through his Counsel or visiting the offices of Respondent personally. The Complainant has suffered mentally and felt torture either by him or his other family Members.
3. That this Hon’ble Forum has its Jurisdiction to investigate this complaint and try on the Respondent.
4. That the claim is within the Limitation Period of two years from the date on which the cause of action has arisen i.e. 15.06.2012.
5. That the complaint has deposited necessary fee vide Challan No……… dated with the State Bank of India, Faridabad. (A copy of the same is herewith annexed at page 17/C)
Prayer
1. That the Complainant prays before this Hon’ble Consumer Forum that it may kindly like to consider passing an Order to directing the Respondent/Opposite party to return a paid amount of Rs. 7,59,1,37.50 (Rs. 6,59,1,37.50 as a cost of Flat + 1,00,000/- Premium of the flat, total sum Coues Rs. 7,59,1,37.50 to the complainant along with an interest @ 24% p.a from the date of deposit of amount with the Respondent/ Opposite party)
2. That the Complainant may be paid a total sum of Rs. 5, 50,000/- (Five Lac Fifty Thousand Only) as a compensation towards his Financial loss through paying High Rent to the Land Lord and physical and mental torture given by the Respondent /Opposite party to the Complainant.
3. That in case Respondent/opposite party may ready to give another flat in the ongoing other projects forum may kindly direct him that the Respondent may come out with complete details price esclatnation, period, status of the flat, discount if any and other terms and conditions etc.
4. Any further, Relief as this Hon’ble Forum may feel deem fit and appropriate on the Merit of case as well as in the interest of the Complainant and in the interest of Justice.

Dated: - 2.05.2014 Complainant
Place: - Faridabad

[aksh2006]

I have filed a consumer case against RPS . If anybody is interested to please call me at 9xxxxxxxxx.

Regards
Nipun Goyal

What is your result