City Realcom limited has been directed to pay approximately Rs. 4
lakhs as compensation for inability to provide promised services and
some additional amount as compensation for the cost of case.
BEFORE THE SOUTH MUMBAI DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,
Puravatha Bhavan, 1st Floor, General Nagesh Marg, Near Mahatma Gandhi
Hospital, Opposite M.D. College, Parel, Mumbai – 400 012.
Complaint No.SMF/MUM/09/2012
Date of filing : 18/01/2012
Date of Order : 22/04/2014
Chhaya V. Mhapsekar,
R/o. – E/401, Nutan Arjun Nagar,
Cross Road No.4, Liberty Garden,
Malad (W), Mumbai. ....Complainant.
V/s.
1. City Realcom Ltd.
Through it’s Proprietor & Director,
Gita Rajaki,
Director, City Realcom Ltd.
96-B Wing, 9th Floor, Mittal Tower,
Nariman Point, Mumbai.
2. Masud Khan, Director,
City Realcom Ltd.,
96-B Wing, 9th Floor, Mittal Tower,
Nariman Point, Mumbai. … Opposite Parties No.1 & 2.
Coram :
Shri.S.M. Ratnakar : Hon’ble President
Shri.G.H. Rathod : Hon’ble Member
Appearance : Shri. Mohsin Khan, Ld.Advocate for the Complainant.
None for the Opposite Parties (ex-parte).
O R D E R
PER SHRI. S.M. RATNAKAR – HON’BLE PRESIDENT
1) The Complainant has prayed that the Opposite Parties be directed to
pay Rs.3,99,875/- to the Complainant and to pass any other equitable
reliefs and cost of this complaint.
2) According to the Complainant, the Opposite Parties No.1 & 2 used to
promise attractive financial returns through their different schemes
and various attractive schemes and booklet were published by them
which are marked at Exh.‘A’ colly. The Complainant had invested huge
amount of Rs.1,27,000/- on 12/04/2008 in five years schemes as down
payments as financial option car and entered in an agreements with the
schemes alongwith the Opposite Party No.1 & 2. The copies of receipts
of investment alongwith agreement are marked as Exh.‘B’. It is
submitted that the Opposite Party No.2 is the Director of Opposite
Party No.1. According to the Complainant, the Opposite Parties ought
to have return Rs.5,16,500/- in view of the investment dtd.12/04/08.
It is submitted that the Opposite Party did pay an amount of
Rs.1,16,625/- to the Complainant. It is alleged that thereafter the
Opposite Parties have not paid any amount as per agreement and an
amount of Rs.3,99,875/- is remained to be paid to the Complainant. It
is alleged that the Opposite Parties are legally bound to pay the
aforesaid amount. It is alleged that the number of investors including
the present Complainant had invested their hard money, but the
Opposite Parties did not comply their assurance. It is submitted that
the Opposite Parties as per the reports in the news paper came to be
arrested by the Police Authorities but they are shirking their
responsibilities for providing service as promised. It is thus,
submitted that the prayer made in para 1 of this order may be allowed
against the Opposite Parties.
3) In spite of publication of notice in Daily Newspaper ‘Punnanagari’
dtd.30/04/2012, the Opposite Parties No.1 & 2 did not appear before
this Forum hence, the complaint is proceeded ex-parte against them.
The Complainant has filed her affidavit of evidence. The Complainant
has also filed written argument. The Complainant has filed documents
showing the schemes floated by Opposite Party No.1 & 2 and the payment
agreed by them to be a refunded or paid to the Complainant in future.
The Complainant has also placed on record. The copy of the agreement
executed by the Opposite Parties No.1 & 2 in her favour and placed on
record the chart of expected amount which was to be refunded by the
Opposite Parties No.1 & 2. she has also placed on record the documents
of payment she has received from the Opposite Parties on the said
documents and the chart placed on record by the Complainant it appears
that the Complainant is entitle for Rs.3,99,875/- from the Opposite
Parties No.1 & 2. The case made out by the Complainant against the
Opposite Parties goes unchallenged. We are therefore of the view that
the Complainant is entitled for the said amount for not providing the
services as agreed by them and compensation of Rs.4,500/- and cost of
Rs.1,200/-. In the result the following order is passed -
O R D E R
i. Complaint No.09/2012 is partly allowed against the Opposite Parties.
ii. The Opposite Parties are directed to pay an amount of
Rs.3,99,875/- (Rs. Three Lacs Ninety Nine Thousand Eight Hundred
Seventy Five Only) for not providing the services to the Complainant
as agreed by the Opposite Parties and Rs.4,500/- (Rs. Four Thousand
Five Hundred Only) towards the compensation and Rs.1,200/- (Rs.One
Thousand Two Hundred Only) towards the cost to the Complainant.
iii. The Opposite Parties shall comply with the aforesaid order within
one month from the date of service of this order.
iv. Certified copies of this order be furnished to the parties.
Sd/- Sd/-
(Shri. G.H. Rathod) (Shri.S.M. Ratnakar)
Hon’ble Member Hon’ble President
can anyone clarify on this...
Anand.K
09941806090
lakhs as compensation for inability to provide promised services and
some additional amount as compensation for the cost of case.
BEFORE THE SOUTH MUMBAI DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,
Puravatha Bhavan, 1st Floor, General Nagesh Marg, Near Mahatma Gandhi
Hospital, Opposite M.D. College, Parel, Mumbai – 400 012.
Complaint No.SMF/MUM/09/2012
Date of filing : 18/01/2012
Date of Order : 22/04/2014
Chhaya V. Mhapsekar,
R/o. – E/401, Nutan Arjun Nagar,
Cross Road No.4, Liberty Garden,
Malad (W), Mumbai. ....Complainant.
V/s.
1. City Realcom Ltd.
Through it’s Proprietor & Director,
Gita Rajaki,
Director, City Realcom Ltd.
96-B Wing, 9th Floor, Mittal Tower,
Nariman Point, Mumbai.
2. Masud Khan, Director,
City Realcom Ltd.,
96-B Wing, 9th Floor, Mittal Tower,
Nariman Point, Mumbai. … Opposite Parties No.1 & 2.
Coram :
Shri.S.M. Ratnakar : Hon’ble President
Shri.G.H. Rathod : Hon’ble Member
Appearance : Shri. Mohsin Khan, Ld.Advocate for the Complainant.
None for the Opposite Parties (ex-parte).
O R D E R
PER SHRI. S.M. RATNAKAR – HON’BLE PRESIDENT
1) The Complainant has prayed that the Opposite Parties be directed to
pay Rs.3,99,875/- to the Complainant and to pass any other equitable
reliefs and cost of this complaint.
2) According to the Complainant, the Opposite Parties No.1 & 2 used to
promise attractive financial returns through their different schemes
and various attractive schemes and booklet were published by them
which are marked at Exh.‘A’ colly. The Complainant had invested huge
amount of Rs.1,27,000/- on 12/04/2008 in five years schemes as down
payments as financial option car and entered in an agreements with the
schemes alongwith the Opposite Party No.1 & 2. The copies of receipts
of investment alongwith agreement are marked as Exh.‘B’. It is
submitted that the Opposite Party No.2 is the Director of Opposite
Party No.1. According to the Complainant, the Opposite Parties ought
to have return Rs.5,16,500/- in view of the investment dtd.12/04/08.
It is submitted that the Opposite Party did pay an amount of
Rs.1,16,625/- to the Complainant. It is alleged that thereafter the
Opposite Parties have not paid any amount as per agreement and an
amount of Rs.3,99,875/- is remained to be paid to the Complainant. It
is alleged that the Opposite Parties are legally bound to pay the
aforesaid amount. It is alleged that the number of investors including
the present Complainant had invested their hard money, but the
Opposite Parties did not comply their assurance. It is submitted that
the Opposite Parties as per the reports in the news paper came to be
arrested by the Police Authorities but they are shirking their
responsibilities for providing service as promised. It is thus,
submitted that the prayer made in para 1 of this order may be allowed
against the Opposite Parties.
3) In spite of publication of notice in Daily Newspaper ‘Punnanagari’
dtd.30/04/2012, the Opposite Parties No.1 & 2 did not appear before
this Forum hence, the complaint is proceeded ex-parte against them.
The Complainant has filed her affidavit of evidence. The Complainant
has also filed written argument. The Complainant has filed documents
showing the schemes floated by Opposite Party No.1 & 2 and the payment
agreed by them to be a refunded or paid to the Complainant in future.
The Complainant has also placed on record. The copy of the agreement
executed by the Opposite Parties No.1 & 2 in her favour and placed on
record the chart of expected amount which was to be refunded by the
Opposite Parties No.1 & 2. she has also placed on record the documents
of payment she has received from the Opposite Parties on the said
documents and the chart placed on record by the Complainant it appears
that the Complainant is entitle for Rs.3,99,875/- from the Opposite
Parties No.1 & 2. The case made out by the Complainant against the
Opposite Parties goes unchallenged. We are therefore of the view that
the Complainant is entitled for the said amount for not providing the
services as agreed by them and compensation of Rs.4,500/- and cost of
Rs.1,200/-. In the result the following order is passed -
O R D E R
i. Complaint No.09/2012 is partly allowed against the Opposite Parties.
ii. The Opposite Parties are directed to pay an amount of
Rs.3,99,875/- (Rs. Three Lacs Ninety Nine Thousand Eight Hundred
Seventy Five Only) for not providing the services to the Complainant
as agreed by the Opposite Parties and Rs.4,500/- (Rs. Four Thousand
Five Hundred Only) towards the compensation and Rs.1,200/- (Rs.One
Thousand Two Hundred Only) towards the cost to the Complainant.
iii. The Opposite Parties shall comply with the aforesaid order within
one month from the date of service of this order.
iv. Certified copies of this order be furnished to the parties.
Sd/- Sd/-
(Shri. G.H. Rathod) (Shri.S.M. Ratnakar)
Hon’ble Member Hon’ble President
can anyone clarify on this...
Anand.K
09941806090
No comments:
Post a Comment