Back
SUBHASH CHANDRA
Anubhav Singhal – Appellant
Versus
Raheja Developers Ltd. – Respondent
Order
This consumer complaint under section 21(a)(i) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (in short, the ‘Act’) alleges unfair trade practice and deficiency in service in delay in handing over possession of a flat booked by the complainants in a project promoted and executed by the opposite party within the promised time and seeking refund of the amount deposited with compensation and other costs.
2. The complainants state that they booked a flat with the opposite party in their project “Raheja Shilas” in Sector 109, Gurgaon, Haryana and were allotted Flat No. IF 14-02 admeasuring 2062.33 sq ft for a sale consideration of Rs 1,02,11,774/-. A Flat Buyer Agreement (FBA) was signed between the parties on 29.08.2011 and as per clause 4.2 possession was to be handed over within 30 months from the date of the FBA. Opposite party was liable to pay compensation @ Rs 7/- per sq ft of the super area per month for the period of delay. The penalty for delay in payment by the complainant was 18% on monthly compounded basis as per clause 3.15 Between 25.03.2011 and 04.02.2014 the complainant paid Rs 89,07,825/- in several instalments. Possession was not handed over after expiry of 30 months on 2
Installment – Once the instalments were collected, the buyers are sought to be non-suited on a multitude of grounds, primarily the liability of the Government in not providing infrastructure and to c....
(1) Bald assertion – In the absence of any evidence being brought on record, merely a bald assertion that the project was delayed due to in action by the Government or its statutory organisations and....
Valid Possession – Mere completion of structure cannot be said that the Apartment is ready for valid possession.
Consumer rights include timely possession and refund in cases of inordinate delays by builders, ensuring protections under consumer law are maintained.
Consumers are entitled to refunds with interest when developers fail to deliver property due to one-sided contract terms viewed as unfair trade practices.
Committed date - the committed date has to be reckoned from the date of the sanction of building plans which includes the date of approval of the fire safety scheme.
“Since the possession of subject flats were not delivered within the stipulated time, allottee held entitled for refund of amount deposited with interest.”
Earnest Money Clause – Earnest Money Clause in the Agreement being wholly one-sided and unjustified constitutes an unfair trade practice and therefore, is not binding upon the Complainant.
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
