IMPORTANT POINT
Compensation - Since the compensation in the form of interest has already been awarded, the Respondents/Complainants shall not be entitled for any other compensation.

ORDER

The present Appeals have been filed against the Orders dated 22.10.2021 passed by the Rajasthan State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Mumbai (hereinafter referred to as State Commission), whereby the State Commission allowed the Complaints filed by the respective Complainants/Respondents and directed the Opposite Parties, i.e., Unique Affordable Homes Private Limited and Unique Builders and Developers (hereinafter referred to as the Appellant Developer) to refund the amount deposited by the respective Complainants/Respondents alongwith interest @10% p.a. with effect from the date of respective date of deposit till realization. The Opposite Parties were also directed to pay Rs.2,00,000/- towards compensation of for mental agony and Rs.50,000/- towards cost of litigation.

2. Since the facts and questions of law involved in all these Appeals are similar, these Appeals are being disposed off through this common Order. However, for the sake of convenience, FA No. 275 of 2022 is treated as the lead case and the facts enumerated hereinafter are taken from Consumer Complaint No. 54/2020.

3. Brief facts of the case as enumerated in CC No. 54/2020 are that the Appellants Developer had launched a Residential Housing Project under the name and style of “My Haveli” (hereinafter referred to as the Project) located at Village Ramchandrapura, Ajmer Road, Tehsil Sanganer, District Jaipur in the year 2008. Alluring by the assurance and information by the Appellants, the Complainant/Respondent herein, by paying a sum of Rs.3,60,000/- towards booking amount to the Appellants on 05.03.2012, booked a 3 BHK Luxury Flat No. 5618 at 6th Floor in Tower A of the Project for a total sale consideration of Rs.28,57,500/-. Agreement to Sell (hereinafter referred to as the Agreement) was executed between the Parties on 08.04.2013. It is the say of the Complainant that at the time of booking, he was assured that the possession of the Flat would be handed over in the month of December, 2015 but as per terms of the Agreement, the delivery of the possession was to be offered after expiry of 60 months alongwith a grace period of 12 months from the date of Agreement, i.e., by 07.04.2019. It was also averred that although most of the terms of the Agreement were unfair, one-sided and only in favour of the Appellants, yet the Respondent/Complainant had to sign the said Agreement under the threat of forfeiture of earnest money. The Respondent/Complainant had deposited 90% of the sale consideration, i.e., Rs.24,79,397/- on different dates upto 15.07.2015 as per demand of the Appellants Developer. Despite that the Appellants Developer miserably failed to deliver the possession of the Flat upto December 2015, i.e., assured time. Rather the Appellants could not complete the construction nor delivered the possession till 07.04.2019, i.e. even after expiry of 12 months of grace period as per terms of the Agreement. Alleging deficiency in service on the part of the Appellants, Consumer Complaint was filed before the State Commission seeking directions to Appellants to refund the amount of Rs.25,14,087/- alongwith interest @18% p.a. from the date of respective payments; to pay a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- as compensation for mental and physical harassment; Rs.2 lakh towards Advocate Fee alongwith Rs.25,000/- as litigation expenses.

4. The Appellants contested the Complaint before the State Commission by submitting that the present Complaint is not maintainable as the Complainant had booked the flat for investment purpose; as per terms of the Agreement the Appellants were liable to deliver the Possession of the Flat by 07.04.2019 but the delay caused due to demonetization, stay order on Bajri mining, Covid-19 Pandemic outbreak in the month of 2020. It was contended that they offered the possession on April 2021 after completion of construction but the Respondent / Complainant did not accept the possession and has filed the present Complaint. It was submitted that the r