Consumer courts' jurisdiction is based on statutory provisions, focusing on protecting consumer interests against defaults. Non-compliance by service providers cannot be excused by technical arguments.

JUDGMENT :

VINOD S. BHARDWAJ, J.

CM-5595-CWP-2024

For the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is allowed and Annexures P-17 to P-24 are taken on record.

CWP-4133-2024

1. Challenge in the present writ petition is to the order dated 27.10.2023 passed by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi in the matter of M/s Crystal Buildtech Pvt. Ltd. vs. Rupesh Gupta in Revision Petition No. 1570 of 2023.

2. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner inter alia contends that the petitioner-Company is dealing in the Real Estate business and has developed a plotted township namely “Krish Seasons” at Village Bureda, Tehsil Tijara, District Alwar, Rajasthan.

3. The respondent No.2-Consumer had approached the petitioner- Company and showed his interest in the project developed by the petitioner. He made an application for provisional registration of a plot admeasuring an area of 120.09 sq. yards therein. A booking amount of Rs. 1,80,000/- was paid through Cheque No. 742971 dated 19.04.2014 drawn on ICICI Bank. The provisional letter of allotment was issued on 29.05.2014 to the respondent No. 2 informing that Plot No. 137 in the said project had been provisionally allotted to him. The allotment agreement was eventually executed on 31.10.2014. A total payment of Rs. 16,79,661/- was made by respondent No.2-Consumer between the period from 19.04.2014 to 20.12.2016 against the total sale consideration of Rs. 23,95,795/-. It is further contended by the Counsel that a completion certificate with respect to the plotted development on the said project was issued to the petitioner on 18.07.2018 and thereafter an offer of possession was sent to the respondent- Consumer vide letter dated 20.07.2018. He contends that the possession of the developed was to be delivered within 24 months of commencement of construction, which as per the respondent-Consumer, commenced on 05.09.2016. Hence, the possession had to be delivered by the petitioner- Developer on or before 04.09.2018 and that the petitioner-developer was compliant of its contractual obligation by offering possession on 20.07.2018 i.e. nearly two months before the time agreed under the agreement, for delivery of possession. The respondent No.2-Consumer was called upon by the petitioner company to clear the outstanding installments towards the cost of the plot in question so that the actual physical possession could be handed over, however, no payment was made. Instead, the respondent No.2-consumer filed a consumer complaint before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Gurugram (for short “DCDRC, Gurugram”) bearing CC/458/2019 which was withdrawn on technical grounds seeking liberty to file a fresh complaint. Thereafter the Consumer Complaint No. 230 of 2020 was filed by respondent No.2 before the DCDRC, Gurugram even though the company was not in default.

4. The petitioner-Company however entered appearance before the DCDRC, Gurugram and filed its reply taking various objections with respect to the maintainability of the said complaint as also to the territorial jurisdiction. The DCDRC, Gurugram passed its award on 02.08.2021 against the petitioner-Company and in favour of respondent No.2 directing the petitioner-Company to refund the deposited amount of Rs. 16,79,661/- alongwith interest @ 9% per annum from the date of deposit of each installment till its realization alongwith compensation towards mental agony and litigation expenses as well.

5. Aggrieved thereof, the petitioner-Company preferred an appeal before the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Panchkula (for short “SCDRC, Panchkula”) registered as Appea