NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, NEW DELHI
Dr. Inder Jit Singh, Presiding Member
Shweta Singhal and Anr. – Complainants
versus
BPTP Ltd. and Anr. – Opp. Parties
Consumer Case No.37 of 2020
Decided on 3.10.2024
Possession of flat – Inordinate delay in handing over possession of flat by OPs as per promised specifications – OC still not been obtained – Deficiency in service – Unfair trade practice – Refund of amount alongwith fair delay compensation/interest from OPs – Construction of additional floor, without the express consent of complainants. Seriously affect their rights in terms of sharing of common facilities, their proportionate share in land ownership etc. – There is inordinate delay in handing over possession of flat by OPs as per promised specifications – Objection Certificate (OC) has still not been obtained – Complainants cannot be made to wait for an indefinite time & suffer financially – Complainants have legitimate right to claim refund alongwith fair delay compensation/interest from OPs – OPs shall refund entire principal amount of Rs. 2,09,76,040/- to complainant alongwith S.I. @ 12% p.a. from date of each payment till date of refund & compensation of Rs.15 lakh on account of not constructing the unit as per promised specifications, doing major changes without consent of complainants, not obtaining OC and not delivering possession as per committed timeline, which constitutes serious deficiency in service on part of OPs, who indulged into unfair trade practice, which has caused harassment and Mental agony to complainants as well as financial loss and even calls for imposition of punitive damages – OPs shall also pay sum of Rs.1 lakh as cost of litigation to complainants. (Paras 34, 35, 42, 43)
Result: Complaint disposed of.
ORDER
The present Consumer Complaint (CC) has been filed by the Complainants against Opposite Parties (OPs) as detailed above, inter alia praying for following directions:-
a. To direct the Opposite Party No.1 and 2 to immediately stop and demolish the construction of 3rd floor (on top/roof of 2nd floor on the plot comprising ground, first and second floor raised on plot No.A-121, Amstoria Project of the OPs, situated at Gurugram, Haryana which fact was withheld or never disclosed by the OPs prior to booking of the Residential ground floor flat on the same plot and even before starting construction of 3rd floor (on top/roof of 2nd floor on the plot comprising ground, first and second floor, and/or
In the alternative,
Direct the OPs to pay compensation of Rs.45,00,000/- to the complainants on account of proportionate land division to 4 allottees instead of 3 allottees, burdening the complainants with congestion w.r.t. parking, utilities and common space and part from the profit opposite parties are making by constructing additional floor, and
b. Direct the OPs to pay interest @ 12% and to refund the excess GST amount paid.
c. Direct the OPs to pay an amount of Rs.25,00,000/- alongwith interest @ 18% for hardship and injury, both physical and mentally.
d. Direct the OPs not to charge any escalation on account of increased construction cost.
e. Litigation cost of Rs.1,50,000/- is also prayed.
2. Notice was issued to the Opposite Parties. Parties filed Written Statement/Reply, Rejoinder, Evidence by way of an Affidavit, Written Arguments/Synopsis and additional / amended written arguments as per details given below:
| 1 | D/o Filing CC in NCDRC | 13.01.2020 |
| 2 | D/o Issue of Notice to OP(s) | 04.02.2020 |
| 3 | D/o Filing Reply/Written Statement by Ops | 06.03.2020 |
| 4 | D/o filing Rejoinder by the Complainant(s) | 01.10.2021 |
| 5 | D/o Filing Evidence by way of Affidavit by the Complainant(s) | 01.10.2021 |
| 6 | D/o Filing Evidence by way of Affidavit by the Ops | 06.06.2022 |
| 7 | D/o filing Written Synopsis by the Complainant(s) | 14.11.2022 and additional written synopsis on 06.05.2024 |
| 8 | D/o filing Written Synopsis by the Ops | 06.05.2024 |
3. Brief facts of the case, as emerged from the pleadings of the parties and other case records are that Complainants being approached by the sales representatives of the Opposite Parties regarding purchase of plot being developed and constructed by OP No.1 and 2 told the Complainants that limited number of low rising flats are left in the project named ‘Amstoria’ situated at Gurgaon and that they (OPs) shall be developing only ground, first and second floor on the said plot. They were also shown the location and the site brochures, in which details of all the units were mentioned. It was assured to the complainants that project would be completed within 30 months from the date of booking.
4. The complainants applied for a flat on plot no.A-121 on Ground floor with construction linked plan having built-up area admeasuring 3650 sq. ft. The basic sale price was agreed as of Rs.2,01,99,996/- and opposite parties also charged preferential location charges for 24 meter wide road (5% of BSP), two side open plot (10% of BSP, park facing (5% of BSP) as well as club membership charges of Rs.2,00,000/-. The Opposite Parties also charged development charges of Rs.8.67 lacs in lumpsum. The complainants paid more than 10% of basic sale price i.e. Rs.20,90,871/-.
5. Prior to booking the said flat, the complainant inquired in respect of one High Tension pillar and cables lying on their plot i.e. A-121, on which the OPs assured the complainants that high tension pillar and cable is temporary and it shall be removed within 25-30 days. On the said assurance of the OPs, complainant booked their unit in the said project of the OPs and they were also assured at the time of booking that OPs will execute the Builder Buyer Agreement (BBA) at the earliest.
6. The Complainants go
Emaar MGF Land Ltd vs. Aftab Singh
Wg. Cdr. Arifur Rahman Khan and Aleya Sultana and Ors. vs. DLF Southern Homes Pvt. Ltd. and Ors.
Ireo Grace Realtech Pvt.Ltd. vs. Abhishek Khanna and Anr.
Possession of flat – Home buyers cannot be made to wait for possession of flat for an indefinite period.
Delay compensation - The payment of delay compensation at the rate of Rs.5 per square feet per month by the OP(s) is an admission of delay on their part. Hence, the complainant(s) in the present circ....
(1) Contract - A term of a contract, will not be final and binding if it is shown that the consent to the said term was not really voluntary, if the person giving consent had no other choice. (2) Nom....
Consumers are entitled to refunds for unreasonable delays in property possession, affirming their rights under contracts.
Consumer complaints against builders for delays in possession must be resolved by allowing refunds without penalty or interest when construction is not completed as per agreement.
Failure by the Opposite Party to deliver possession within the stipulated time constituted a deficiency in service, entitling the Complainants to a refund with interest.
Delay in possession by the builder entitles homebuyers to a full refund of deposits, as per consumer protection laws.
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.