Back
J. RAJENDRA, SUBHASH CHANDRA
Lalita Tanwar – Appellant
Versus
Hamilton Heights Pvt. Ltd. – Respondent
ORDER
Subhash Chandra, Presiding Member—This complaint filed under Section 21 (a) (i) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (in short, the “Act”) alleges deficiency in service by the Opposite Party in delay in handing over possession of the apartment booked by the Complainants in a project promoted and executed by the Opposite Party.
2. This common order will dispose of Consumer Complaint Nos. 1852 of 2017 and 1853 of 2017 as the facts in both complaints are similar and relate to the same Complainants and the same project of the Opposite Party. For reasons of convenience, Consumer Complaint No. 1852 of 2017 is taken as the lead case.
3. Upon notice, Opposite Party contested the complaint by way of written statement. Complainants thereafter filed their rejoinder. Parties filed their evidence by way of affidavit. Short synopsis of arguments was also filed by both the parties.
4. The relevant facts of the case, in brief, are that the Complainants had booked a 3 BHK with servant quarter apartment no. C 502, 5th Floor, Tower C admeasuring 1758 sq ft super built up area in the Opposite Party’s project “Hamilton Heights”, Sector 37, Faridabad on 15.01.2008 for a total consideration of Rs.78
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%.
Flat Buyers have right to receive fair delay compensation when developers unduly and unreasonably delayed possession as per Agreement.
Delayed Payment – Opposite Party shall not charge any interest for delayed payment or holding charges in view of the admitted delay on its part.
Writ at large - Deficiency in service in delay in delivery of the flats booked by complainants against consideration is thus writ large.
(1) Earing profits - The onus of establishing that the Complainant was dealing in real estate i.e. in the purchase and sale of plots/ flats in his normal course of business to earn profits, shifts to....
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....
The court affirmed the consumer's rights to compensation for delayed possession despite objections on consumer status after possession was claimed.
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
