9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (12) TMI 363X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... te Party No.1 is a company registered under the Companies Act, 1956. Opposite Party No.2 is the Director of Opposite Party No.1. Opposite Parties Nos.3 & 4 are wife and daughter of Opposite Party No.2. The case of the Complainant is that the Complainant and the Opposite Party No.1 entered into a Settlement Agreement dated 21.11.2006, whereby the Complainant was promised a residential duplex flat in a real estate project labelled as Rajmahal Royal Residency Project, for his personal use. Despite several communications and assurances, the Opposite Parties failed to hand over possession of the said residential duplex flat to the Complainant. 3. The Complainant on being approached with respect to a proposed investment opportunity by Opposite P ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... te Party No.1. Opposite Party No.1 sent letter dated 21.11.2006 to the Complainant acknowledging the entire payment against booking of the said flats and stating that there were no past dues left from either side and full and final receipt of payment for the said flats was confirmed. Opposite Party No.2 assured the Complainant over telephone that significant progress had taken place in the construction of the project and that he would be sending photographs as proof. The Complainant, however, did not receive any proof of construction. The Complainant, vide letter dated 12.12.2012, informed Opposite Party No. 2 regarding his visit to Jaipur and noticed that no work was being done on the project even after 5 years from the date of Settlement. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... March 28, 2013 till the date of payment; d. Pass an order calling upon the Opposite Parties to certify and transmit all necessary records relating to the case before this Hon'ble Commission or cause them to be produced at the time of hearing so that conscionable justice may be done to the Complainant; e. Pass an order awarding the costs of the present proceedings in favour of the Complainant and against the Opposite Parties; f. Pass such other or further order or orders, direction or directions as may be considered fit and expedient In the facts and circumstances of the case." 5. The Opposite Parties resisted the Complaint by filing written statement on the ground that the Complaint is barred by limitation under section 24-A of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... held liable. It was submitted that initially the Complainant was allotted a duplex flat but later the Complainant opted for two residential flats ad measuring 1480 sq. feet each. Accordingly, the Complainant had filled two forms for allotment of two flats of 1480 sq. feet, instead of duplex flat. There was no deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties, rather, immediately after completion of the project, Opposite Parties offered the flats to the Complainant, vide letter dated 13.04.2013. Despite that, the Complainant did not come forward to take possession of the flats and instead filed the present Complaint just to harass the Opposite Parties. 7. Heard the Learned Counsel for the Parties and carefully perused the record. Le ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... en the order dated 05.09.2008 and the dismissal of the Writ Petition on 29.01.2009. The Opposite Parties, therefore, have no valid justification for the unreasonable delay in handing over possession of the residential duplex flat to the Complainant. Due to this inordinate delay, the Complainant lost confidence that the flat would ever be made available to him, and has accordingly prayed for payment of Rs.5,00,30,000/-. 8. Learned Counsel for the Opposite Party submitted that the Complaint was time barred and is liable to be dismissed. It was also stated that the Opposite Parties have not committed any deficiency in service and the Complaint is devoid of merit. This Commission did not have the jurisdiction to entertain the present Complaint ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 96, the Complainant, on being approached by and relying upon tacit assurances given by Opposite Party No.2 and his father with respect to a proposed investment opportunity, decided to invest an amount of Rs.17,00,000/- (Rupees Seventeen lakhs only) on the basis of Memorandum of Understanding which was intended to be used for the purpose as decided between the Parties." Admittedly, the Complainant invested the amount in the project as a partner. Subsequently the Complainant withdrew as a partner and requested Opposite Party No.2 for refund of his investment amount with interest. As Opposite Parties failed to refund the amount, the Complainant entered into an agreement dated 21.11.2006 wherein he was promised that he would be given a duplex ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
