IMPORTANT POINT
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 compensation.

ORDER

Sudip Ahluwalia, Member—This Consumer Complaint has been filed against the Opposite Party-M/s. Raheja Developers Limited, alleging deficiency and unfair trade practice by the Opposite Party for the delay in possession, and seeking delivery of the booked Flat/Apartment with all necessary permission/sanctions/approvals, alongwith compensation/penalty @18% p.a. on the amount so paid by the Complainants, for delayed possession OR, in alternative, refund of the amount paid by the Complainants alongwith interest @ 18% p.a. from the date of payment till its realisation plus damages and costs. Further, the Complainants have also sought compensation of Rs. 25,00,000/- on account of mental tension, harassment, torture and unfair trade practice by the Opposite Party and have also sought costs of the present proceedings amounting to Rs. 1,10,000/-. It may be mentioned that in the complaint as originally filed, the Complainants had not only prayed for getting delivery of possession of the dwelling Unit in question, but had also simultaneously prayed for total refund of the consideration price paid by them. When this anomaly was noted by the Court on 17.5.2023, the Complainants sought a short adjournment to rectify the same. Consequently, they filed an amended complaint by modifying the untenable prayers on 25.5.2023, on which date their prayer for amendment of the original complaint was allowed.

2. The brief facts leading upto the present complaint are that the Opposite Party is a real estate Developer and had advertised its residential independent Floors for sale under the name and style of “Raheja Shilas” situated at Sector-109, Gurugram, Haryana. The Complainants had booked an Apartment on an independent Floor in the said Project for residential purpose for themselves and their family members for a total sale consideration of Rs. 1,16,82,875/- (including all the charges). The Opposite Party had allotted a Flat/Apartment No. IF15-014 measuring 2317 sq.ft. and 556 sq. ft. terrace area in terms of the Allotment Letter dated 28.09.2011, to the Complainants. Consequently, a Flat Buyer’s Agreement dated 28.09.2011 was executed between the parties. The Complainants had booked the said Apartment with a BSP of Rs. 4,175/- per sq.ft. and the terrace @ Rs. 2,087/- per sq.ft. and the total sale consideration of the Flat, was Rs. 1,08,34,125/-. At the time of booking, the Complainants had paid the initial amount of Rs. 27,78,277/-. It is averred that the Complainant had booked the Apartment on the assurance given by the Opposite Party that it had got the approved plan and the independent Floors will be built up as per the approved plans and designs. The Complainants had opted for the Construction Linked Payment Plan. They had paid a sum of Rs. 1,04,50,667/- (Rupees One Crore Four Lakhs Fifty Thousand Six Hundred Sixty Seven only) out of the total consideration.

3. It is further stated that a part of the said sale consideration i.e. Rs. 47,81,000/- was sanctioned by the Financiers, out of which about Rs. 34,79,164/- was availed by the Complainants to pay to the Opposite Party, firstly, from DHFL Finance Limited, and thereafter from PNB Housing Finance Limited to whom the Complainants had regularly serviced the interest or EMI on the financed amount from the year 2013 at the prevailing rate of interest, and more than an amount of Rs. 19,00,000/- had been paid towards interest to its Financiers.

4. Further, it is averred that the Opposite Party, as per Clause 4.2 of the Flat Buyer’s Agreement, had assured to deliver the possession of the Apartment within 24 months with a grace period of 06 months from the date of execution of the Agreement i.e. 28.9.2011. However, the Opposite Party has failed to give possession of the Flat even after 8½ years from the promised date of possession and there is no likelihood of offer of possession of the Flat in question. It is further stated the said Agreement contained various one-sided and arbitrary clauses, and