NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, NEW DELHI
R.K. Agrawal, President
Rituraj and Anr. —Complainants
versus
M/s. EMAAR MGF Land Limited —Opp. Party
Consumer Case No.3488 of 2017
Decided on 27.9.2022
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 – Section 21(a)(i) – [Consumer Protection Act, 2019 —S.58(1)(a)(i)] – Services – Real Estate – Allotment of Flat – Delayed Possession – 9 years - Delay Compensation – Entitlement for - Complaint has been filed for alleged possession of Flat - The Complainants alleging deficiency in service and Unfair Trade Practice on the part of the Opposite Party - There is deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party in not handing over possession to the Complainants by June, 2012, by which time the period prescribed under Clause 13(a) of the Agreement for handing over possession of the Unit in question had expired – Therefore, possession has not been offered to the Complainants and there is inordinate delay of over 9 years in handing over possession to the Complainants. They are entitled to a reasonable compensation therefor - It is not the case of the Opposite Party that there was any default on the part of the Complainants in making the payments demanded by it, inasmuch as it is stated by the Opposite Party that there was default on the part of the Allottees in making the payments – Thus, even if there was any default on the part of the Complainants in making some payment demanded by the Opposite Party, they cannot be blamed as the Project was not complete and it was a Construction Linked Payment Plan – Complaint allowed. [Paras 12 to 14]
Result: Compliant allowed.
ORDER
R.K. Agrawal, President—The present Consumer Complaint has been filed under Section 21 (a) (i) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short “the Act”) by the Complainants, against the Opposite Party, namely, Emaar MGF Land Ltd. seeking the following reliefs:—
“(i) Direct the Opposite Party to handover the possession of the apartment bearing number EHF-350-C-GF-024, complete in all respects to the Complainants immediately as per the Buyer’s Agreement and execute all the necessary and required documents in respect of the said flat in favour of the complainant or in alternative provide a ready to move in flat to the complainant which is of identical size and in similar locality or in alternative pay a sum of Rs.1,75,00,000/- being the available market rate of the similar house @ Rs.10,000/- per sq. ft., the apartment being the size of 1750 sq. ft. to enable the Complainant to purchase another house on their own.
(ii) Direct the Opposite Party to pay interest @12% p.a. on the sum collected by the OP towards the house from the date of possession as per the buyer’s agreement till the actual possession.
(iii) Grant immunity to the complainants from the payment of any charges incurred due to any escalation in cost including enhanced Service Tax.
(iv) Direct the O.P. to pay a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs Only) to the complainants towards the mental agony and harassment and the cost of litigation.”
2. Facts giving rise to the present Complaint are that the Opposite Party, was developing a residential gated Colony known as “Emerald Hills” at Sector, 65, Gurgaon, Haryana. On the basis of lucrative advertisements and representations made by the representatives of the Opposite Party, the Complainants, who were looking for a residential home for their personal use applied for booking of an Independent Floor on 05.06.2009. The Builder-Buyer’s Agreement was executed on 03.12.2009 and the Complainants were allotted the Independent Floor bearing no. EHF-350-C-GF-024, located at Ground Floor, in Sector Coral having Super Area of 162.58 sq. mtrs., for a total sale consideration of Rs.76,47,030/-. According to Clause 13(a) of the Agreement, the possession of the Independent Floor was to be handed over within 27 months from the date of execution of the Agreement, along with a grace period of 3 months.
3. It is averred that the Complainants were assured by the Opposite Party that the construction would be completed within the stipulated time and that the possession would be offered as committed in the Builder-Buyer’s Agreement. It is stated that the Complainants have made the payments towards the sale consideration in a time bound manner.
4. It is alleged that some of the Clauses of the Agreement were unreasonable and one-sided in favour of the Opposite Party and that the Complainants were forced to sign on the dotted lines as it is and in case it was not acceptable to the Complainants, they were threatened that their allotment would be cancelled and earnest money would be forfeited. Therefore, the Complainants were left with no other option but to sign the Agreement, which contain many unreasonable Clauses.
5. It is averred that the Complainants have made all payments on time as demanded by the Opposite Party and in total the Complainants paid a sum of Rs.52,38,630/-. Despite collecting substantial amount of money the Opposite Party failed to adhere the time schedule and deliver the possession of the Unit as Agreed in the Agreement. Despite repeated communications from the Complainants and personal visits neither they were given satisfactory response nor the possession of the unit was handed over to them on time. It is pleaded in the Complaint that the Opposite Party failed to deliver the possession of the Apartment within the stipulated time and therefore, the Complainants are entitled for interest on the amount paid @24% p.a. from the promised date of delivery of possession till the actual date of possession, keeping in view
Delayed Possession - possession has not been offered to the Complainants and there is inordinate delay of over 9 years in handing over possession to the Complainants. They are entitled to a reasonabl....
(1) Negligence on Part of Builder – If the builder, whose services are engaged by a buyer for construction of a residential house for him fails to complete the construction and deliver its possession....
Delay in delivering possession of property constitutes deficiency of service, entitling consumer to refund and compensation under Consumer Protection Act.
Consumer agreements with one-sided clauses are unenforceable; delayed possession incurs compensation at 8% interest.
Fair and Delay Compensation - Opposite Party has not given any timeline when it will give possession of the Unit to the Complainants. Therefore, the Complainants are entitled for fair and delay compe....
Super Built-up area – The alteration in super built up area in large projects including common areas is a common feature and is acceptable if is within a reasonable variable of 5 to 10%.
Consumers have the right to timely possession and compensation for undue delays as established by precedents under the Consumer Protection Act.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.