Delhi Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission: The Division Bench of Justice Sangita Dhingra Sehgal (President) and Anil Srivastava (Member) addresses a builder-buyer dispute wherein refund in view of delayed possession along with incomplete internal development work was provided to the buyer.
Instant complaint was filed against Parasvnath Developer Ltd.
Crux of the Complaint
Whether the complainant is entitled to the refund of the amount deposited with interest?
Possession of the plot land booked by the complainant was not handed over within the time agreed to despite the complainant has made the payment to the extent sought from time to time.
Factual Matrix
OPs had promised that the internal development works of the colony will be completed within 24 months from the date of signing of the Agreement with a grace period of 6 months in case of force measure. Once the said work would be completed, OPs had assured to give the possession.
Complainants had opted for a Special Payment Plan floated by the OPs where 10% of the total sale consideration is payable at the time of booking of the Plot. The Complainant had also agreed to pay another 15% of the amount within 45 days from the date of booking and the last instalment would be payable by the Complainant at the time the possession is offered. Agreement to this effect was executed between the parties on 03-09-2013.
The plot possession was to be given by 3-09-2015. Further, it was stated that in case of delay in handing over the possession of the Plot beyond the agreed period of 24 months, the OPs would be under an obligation to pay the complainant’s compensation @Rs 10 per sq. Yard of the Plot area per month for the period of delay.
Further, it was submitted that OPs with malafide intentions not to pay the delay charges, issued possession letter to the complainants after a delay of 11 months of scheduled date of possession without completing the internal services as agreed to.
OPs vide the possession letter illegally demanded the balance consideration price.
Complainant made several attempts to settle the score, but all the attempts and efforts were futile due to which the complaint before this Commission had to be filed.
In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, Bench opined that possession of plot not having been handed over within the agreed time, ends of justice would be met if a direction was issued to the OPs to refund the principal amount with simple interest at the rate of 6%.[Alka Pundir v. Parasvnath Developers Ltd., Complaint No. 941 of 2017, decided on 15-07-2021]
Advocates before the Commission:
Ms Suman Tripathy, Counsel for the complainant
Mr Rakesh Bhardwaj, Counsel for the OPs
