IMPORTANT POINT
For the latches of the builders, the flat-purchasers cannot be made to suffer.

ORDER

M. Shreesha, Member—These are Original Complaints bearing No. 2384, 2385, 3006, 3007, 3008, 3652, 3653 and 3654 of 2017 filed under Section 21(a)(i) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short “the Act”) against M/s Ramprastha Promoters And Developers Pvt. Ltd. arrayed as a First Opposite Party and against M/s Blue Bell Proptech Pvt. Ltd. arrayed as a Second Opposite Party seeking the following reliefs:—

“a. Direct the O.P. to refund the entire amount of Rs.62,85,672/- collected from the complainants towards the consideration, along with interest @ 18% p.a. on the amount paid by them from the date of collection of the amounts till it is actually returned to the complainants. Interest up to August 2017 amounts to Rs.51,66,031/-.

b. Direct the O.P. to pay a sum of Rs.5,00,000/-. (Rupees Five Lakhs only) towards mental agony and harassment and towards cost of litigation to the Complainants.

c. Any other order(s) as may be deemed fit and appropriate may also kindly be passed.”

2. Since the facts in all the Complaints are common and the reliefs prayed for are also identical against the same parties, all the Complaints are being disposed of by this common order. However, for the sake of convenience, Complaint No. 2384/2017 is being taken as a lead case.

3. The facts material to the case are that the Complainant, lured by the advertisement issued by the Opposite Parties applied for an Apartment in the housing project floated by the Opposite Parties. It was stated by the Opposite Parties that they have been allotted 60.5112 acres land in village Gadauli Kalan, Tehsil & District, Gurgaon, Haryana, Sector 37-D, Gurgaon, Haryana. It is averred that the total consideration of the Apartment was fixed by the Opposite Parties and the amounts were to be paid as per the fixed payment schedule which was construction-linked. The Builder Buyers Agreement dated 08.11.2011 was entered into between the Complainant and the Opposite Parties, wherein the total sale consideration was fixed to the tune of Rs.71,87,959/-. The promised date of delivery of possession of the Apartment was 31.08.2014. It is averred that the Builder Buyers Agreement was an already prepared Agreement which was one sided and some of the Clauses were totally unreasonable but as there was a substantial time gap between the date of the application and the date on which the Buyer’s Agreement was shown to the Complainants, they had no choice but to sign on it. It was further averred that when the Complainant had made a request to change one of the one sided clauses he was informed that the Agreement had to be signed as it is and no modifications would be entertained. Faced with no other option as an initial booking amount was already paid, the Complainants signed the Builder Buyer Agreement. In the Agreement it is noted that the allotee had paid an amount of Rs.10,82,797/-which included the booking amount of Rs.6,01,346/-.

4. It is pleaded that there was a significant delay in the delivery of possession of the subject flat and the Complainants regularly visited the site but were surprised to see that there was no progress in the construction. No one was present on the site to even answer their queries. Though the promised date of delivery was August, 2014 and there was a delay of almost three years at the time of filing of this Complaint, the construction of the Apartment is far from completion. It is averred that the Complainant had paid a substantial amount of money towards the total sale consideration i.e. an amount of Rs.62,85,672/-. As per Clause 17(a) of the Buyers Agreement it was agreed that if there was any delay on behalf of the Opposite Parties in completing the Project a compensation @ Rs.5/- per sq. ft. per month would be made for every month of delay. It is stated that if the same amount is calculated it would approximately be 1.4% p.a. rate of interes