ORDER

R.K. Agrawal, President.—These Consumer Complaints have been filed by the Complainants under Section 21 (a) (i) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (in short “the Act”) against M/s. Ansal Housing Limited (Formerly M/s. Ansal Housing & Construction Limited). As the issues and facts involved in these matters are similar, except minor variations and all these matters are related to the same project, namely, “Estella” of the Opposite Party and the reliefs sought are identical, hence these Consumer Complaints are being disposed of by this Common Order.

2. For the sake of convenience, Consumer Complaint No. 510 of 2020 is being taken as the lead case.

Consumer Complaint No.510 of 2020

3. The facts in brief as stated in the Complaint are that the Complainants have booked an Apartment on 20.04.2011, with the Opposite Party by paying an amount of Rs.6,17,000/- towards booking. The Complainants have opted for construction linked payment plan. The Apartment Buyer’s Agreement (in short “the Agreement”) was executed on 06.06.2012 for Apartment No. N-0501, Tower N, 3 BHK + Utility, admeasuring 1945 sq. ft., for a total sale consideration of Rs.75,84,025/- including PLC, out of which the Complainants have paid a sum of Rs.72,47,710/-. As per Clause 30 of the Agreement the possession of the Apartment in question was to be delivered within 36 months from the date of execution of the Agreement or within 36 months from the date of obtaining all required sanctions and necessary approvals for commencement of construction, whichever is later with a grace period of 6 months, subject to certain conditions.

4. It is averred by the Complainants that at the time of booking, the Opposite Party had assured them that the Opposite Party had obtained all the necessary approvals and sanctions from the concerned authorities and the possession of the Apartment will be delivered within 3 to 3½ years; that the Agreement was executed belatedly after one year and two months from the date of booking and that too after receiving a substantial amount of Rs.26,08,850/-, which constitutes almost 34% of the total sale consideration of Rs.75,84,025/- and that the Agreement was made to suit the whims of the Opposite Party and some of the Clauses of the Agreement are totally unreasonable and one sided and as the Complainants have already paid a substantial amount they are left with no other option but to sign the Agreement. It is submitted that on the one hand the Opposite Party, has the right to charge interest @ 24% per annum for any delay in payment of instalments by the purchasers, as per Clause 23 of the Agreement and on the other hand the Opposite Party was liable to pay a meagre compensation @ Rs.5/- per sq. ft. per month of the super area, which squarely falls within the ambit of definition of deficiency in service and unfair trade practices as defined under the Consumer Protection Act 1986.

5. It is averred that when the Opposite Party failed to hand over the possession of the Apartment on the due date i.e., 06.12.2015, the Complainants contacted the Opposite Party in the year of 2016 and have made various representations to the Opposite Party with regard to the delivery of possession, however, the Opposite Party failed to give any fixed date for completion of the Project. Thereafter, the Complainants visited the construction site and were shocked to see that the construction was at standstill and there were no workers/labourers at the site and seeing the status of the construction it is understood that the it will take at least another 2 to 3 years to complete the project. It is further averred that despite collecting a substantial amount of Rs.72,47,710/- from the Complainants, the possession of the Apartment, has not been delivered and the construction of the Project is not complete even till the date of filing of the Complaint. The Opposite Party has miserably failed to comply with its contractual obligations of handing over possession of the Apartment w