Back
NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, NEW DELHI
Ram Surat Ram Maurya, Presiding Member
Animesh Gupta —Complainant
versus
M/s. Raheja Developers
Ltd. and Anr. —Opp. Party
Consumer Case No.1390 of 2018
Decided on 1.11.2022
Consumer Protection Act, 1986—S. 21(a)(i) —[Consumer Protection Act, 2019—S.58(1)(a)(i)]—Services – Real Estate – Allotment of Flat – Delayed Possession – Liability of Builder to pay Interest - Complaint has been filed for alleged delay in delivery of possession – Execution of MOU – Sale Deed - The facts relating to the project, booking of the flat by the complainant on 20.11.2014, allotment of the flat, execution of agreement to sell & MOU dated 13.01.2015 and deposits of Rs.10180168/- up to 23.08.2016 by the complainant, including the amount disbursed by ICICI Bank Limited from the loan account of the complainant, have not been disputed. The builder, vide email dated 01.05.2017, informed the complainant that his request for cancellation of the booking and payment would be processed within 60 days after expiry of 36 months from the date of booking. In pursuance of the application dated 28.08.2017, the builder vide email dated 19.12.2017, agreed to refund the amount deposited by the complainant. Although, the builder, in written reply, has stated that he had no concern with the loan taken by the complainant from ICICI Bank Limited but email dated 19.12.2017, was silent in respect of the amount paid by ICICI Bank Limited. The builder has not refunded the amount to the complainant as deposited by him directly and through ICICI Bank Limited (except Rs.20/- lacs on 01.03.2018 and Rs.55846/- on 23.05.2018) in terms of MOU. Therefore, there was deficiency in service on the part of builder – Thus, Under clause-8 of MOU dated 13.01.2015, the builder has agreed to pay interest @18% per annum for the period of delay, in case payment is delayed beyond 60 days of the expiry of 36 months from the date of booking. 60 days period expired on 28.02.2018 but full amount of the complainant has not been refunded as such the builder is liable to pay interest @9% per annum from the date of respective deposit till 28.02.2018 and @18% per annum thereafter - complaint is partly allowed. Opposite party-1 is directed to refund entire amount deposited by the complainant including the loan amount advanced by ICICI Bank Limited. [Paras 9 to 10].
Result: Complaint partly allowed.
ORDER
Heard Mr. S. Surender, Advocate, for the complainant and Mr. Siddharth Banthia, Advocate, for opposite party-1.
2. Above complaint has been filed, for directing opposite party-1 to (i) refund Rs.7446104/- (i.e. the loan amount) with interest @18% per annum from the date of disbursement till the actual payment to the complainant, (ii) refund Rs.2411026/- with interest @18% per annum, from the date of deposit till the date of payment, (iii) pay Rs.55226/- per month with interest @18% per annum, as Pre-EMI paid by the complainant to opposite party-2, (iv) pay Rs.500000/- as compensation for mental agony and harassment, (v) pay Rs.2/- lacs, as the costs of litigation; and (vi) any other relief which is deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.
3. The complainant stated that M/s. Raheja Developers Limited (opposite party-1) (the builder) was a company, registered under the Companies Act, 1956 and engaged in the business of development and construction of group housing projects and selling its units to the prospective buyers. ICICI Bank Limited (opposite party-2) was a banking company and used to provide financial assistance to the public. The builder launched a group housing project in the name of “Raheja Revanta” at village Shikohpur, Sector-78, Gurgaon, in the year 2014 and made wide publicity of the rosy pictures of the project. Allured with the representations of the builder and believing on it, the complainant booked a 1BHK flat on 25.11.2014 and deposited booking amount. The builder allotted Apartment No. C-273, super built area 1197.83 sq.ft., basic sale price of Rs.9188554/- @ of Rs.7671/- per sq.ft. and executed an Agreement to Sell dated 13.01.2015 in favour of the complainant. The builder also executed a Memorandum of Understanding dated 13.01.2015 (MOU). Under Clause-8 of the MOU, the builder promised to deliver possession within 33 months to 36 months from the date of booking; Failing which, the complainant would be entitled to cancel booking and claim compensation @ Rs.1400/- per sq.ft. along with refund of total amount deposited; If the builder fails to refund the amount along with compensation within 60 days, the builder would be liable to pay interest @18% per annum on the deposit of the complainant. Payment plan was “Construction Linked Payment Plan”, under which total payment had to be made in 13 instalments. Last instalment of 5% of sale consideration and other charges had to be paid on receipt of “Occupancy Certificate”. The builder also introduced Subvention and Guaranteed buy-back scheme and under clause-8 of it, the builder undertook to pay Pre-EMI on the loan to the bank till the offer of possession. The complainant availed loan of Rs.7994000/- from ICICI Bank Limited, which was sanctioned on 31.12.2015. The complainant deposited Rs.952266/- on 25.11.2014, Rs.737106/- on 12.01.2015, Rs.9523/- on 28.01.2015, Rs.7542/- on 28.01.2015, Rs.943398/- on 04.03.2015, Rs.51193/- on 27.06.2015, Rs.9530/- on 27.06.2015, Rs.4277/- on 29.12.2015, Rs.4795/- on 16.02.2016, Rs.4794/- on 08.04.2016, Rs.4790/- on 10.06.2016 and Rs.4850/- on 23.08.2016 with the builder. ICICI bank Limited disbursed Rs.5119203/- on 01.04.2015, Rs.423351/- on 25.11.2015, Rs.474618/- on 25.01.2016, Rs.474619/- on 08.04.2016, Rs.61996/- on 06.06.2016, Rs.412214/- on 06.06.2016 and Rs.480103/- on 04.08.2016 to the builder from the loan account of the complainant. The builder realised total Rs.10180168/- from the complainant till 23.08.2016. Due to unforeseen contingencies, the complainant, vide email dated 11.04.2017, cancelled the allotment and asked the builder to buy-back the flat. The builder, vide email dated 11.04.2017, replied that his request to buy-back would be processed as per terms and conditions. The complainant, vide email dated 29.04.2017, made a query as whether he would be require to inform ICICI Bank Limited. The builder, vide email dated 01.05.2017, informed the complainant that his request for buy-b
Liability of Interests - 60 days period expired on 28.02.2018 but full amount of the complainant has not been refunded as such the builder is liable to pay interest @9% per annum from the date of res....
(1) Purpose of pecuniary jurisdiction – purpose of pecuniary jurisdiction, the value of services hired or availed plus compensation shall be the value for the purpose of pecuniary jurisdiction.
Residential buyers are consumers; builders liable for delayed possession sans force majeure proof; refund with interest from deposit dates.
Consumers are entitled to refunds with interest when developers fail to deliver property due to one-sided contract terms viewed as unfair trade practices.
Dotted lines - A term of a contract will not be final and binding if it is shown that that the flat purchasers had no option but to sign on the dotted line, on a contract framed by the builder.
For deficiency in service on part of Developer, refund of amount deposited by respective allotees directed.
Valid Possession – Mere completion of structure cannot be said that the Apartment is ready for valid possession.
A developer's failure to deliver possession of a property within a reasonable time constitutes deficiency of service under consumer protection laws.
Consumers are entitled to refunds as per contract when builders fail to meet obligations, irrespective of claims of investment for profit.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
