SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(Online)(Del) 4416

DELHI STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, NEW DELHI
R. K. Agrawal, J
Manoj Kumar Sharma v. Supertech Ltd.
Complaint No. 524 of 2018



Consumers are entitled to compensation for failure to deliver purchased flats, establishing cause of action despite multiple properties booked.

Headnote:(A) Consumer Protection Act, 1986 - Sections 2(d) and 12 - Deficiency of service - Complaint filed for non-delivery of possession of flats booked - Complainants deemed consumers despite properties being multiple - Jurisdiction determined based on monetary value exceeding limit; case maintains cause of action due to failure to deliver possession. (Paras 9, 10, 20, 22, 25)

(B) Deficiency of Service - It is established that failure to deliver possession constitutes deficiency under the Act, resulting in compensation for the complainants - The OP directed to refund payment with interest and pay compensation for mental agony. (Paras 20, 25, 26)

Table of Content
1. complainants allege deficiency in service for non-delivery of flats. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. complainants have standing due to continued failure to deliver possession. (Para 8 , 10)
3. definition of consumer confirmed, as no commercial purpose established. (Para 11 , 12 , 13)
4. jurisdiction established based on territorial and pecuniary grounds. (Para 16 , 17 , 18)
5. deficiency of service acknowledged; compensation awarded with details on interest. (Para 20 , 24 , 25)

1. The present complaint on being returned by the district Forum vide order dated 16.4.2018 has been filed by the complainants before this Commission under S.12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 alleging deficiency of services by the opposite party and has prayed as under:
(a) Restrain the O.P from demanding the alleged interest of Rs.3,54,066 (against Flat No. 1905) and Rs.3,45,655 (against Flat No. 1906) or any other amount as interest on the alleged non - payment of instalments allegedly w.e.f. June 2010.
(b) Direct the opposite party to issue Allotment letter and handover the possession of the said Flat Nos. F - 1905 and F - 1906 in Supertech Livingston situated at Crossing Republic, NH - 24, Ghaziabad, U.P., with all the promised amenities and facilities and transfer the ownership rights of the same in favour of complainants.
(c) Direct the OP to pay an interest @ 24% p.a. upon the amount of Rs.4,35,130 lying with the OP for the period of delay of handing over the possession of the said flats to the complainants or to adjust such interest in the balance amount of the total sale price of the said flats.
(d) Direct the opposite party to pay a consolidated punitive compensation of Rs.5,00,000 towards loss of time and opportunity and expenses made by the complainants on visits, calls and follow up with OP, and towards the stress, duress, anxiety and mental agony suffered and the trauma undergone by the complainants as result of OP's illegal and mala fide acts and omissions and unfair trade practices.
(e) Grant litigation expenses to the tune of Rs.50,000 in favour of the complainants and against OP.


2. Brief facts necessary for the adjudication of the present complaint are on 4.4.2010 complainants booked a Flat i.e. 1701, measuring 1,425 sq. ft. on 17th Floor in Tower - B of Supertech Livingston Project at Crossing Republic, NH - 24, Ghaziabad, U.P. Thereafter, officials of OP telephonically informed the complainants that the aforesaid flat was already allotted to some other person and due to non - working of SAP of computer of OP the booking of complainants was mistakenly accepted against the aforesaid flat. However, the officials of the OP requested the complainants to choose another flats in lieu of the aforesaid flat and proposed to adjust the booking amount accordingly. Accordingly, two adjacent flats bearing Nos. F - 1905 and F - 1906 were chosen by the complainants keeping in view the future requirements of the family. The possession of the said flats was assured to be given by the OP in August 2012. OP shockingly issued a payment plan wherein he had demanded Rs.3,54,066 (against Flat No. 1905) and Rs.3,45,655 (against Flat No. 1906) on account of interest on alleged non - payment of installments. OP further refused to issue allotment letter / buyer agreement unless the complainants pay the hefty illegal amount of interest.
The complainants over the time had paid a sum of Rs.4,35,130 to the OP as and when demanded by him. The complainants also sent a notice dated 23.5.2012 to the OP asking for the issuance of allotment letter, payment schedule, monthly installments from the date of booking of the flat No. 1905 and 1906 and exclude the interest illegally charged but it is of no avail.

3. During the course of the proceedings, notice was issued to the OP on 10.6.2013, the Counsel for the OP appeared on 17.10.2013 and the copy of complaint was supplied to him. Subsequently, the OP neither appeared nor filed his written statement within the statutory
























































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top