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

2022 Supreme(Online)(Del) 7229

NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, NEW DELHI
R. K. Agrawal, J
Kamlesh Kumari v. Ireo Grace Realtech Pvt. Ltd.
Consumer Complaint No. 1110 of 2019



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Deepak Kumar Khushalani
For the Respondents: Mr. Gaurav Sharma

The Developer's failure to deliver possession constitutes unfair trade practice, mandating refund and compensation.

Headnote:The Complainants filed a Consumer Complaint under Section 21(a)(i) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, seeking refund for a flat not delivered by the Developer. The Court found the Developer liable for delay, ordering refund and delay compensation at 9% per annum. The clause in the Buyer’s Agreement was deemed one-sided, supporting the claim of unfair trade practices. The refund must occur within three months and additional compensation if further delays arise.

Table of Content
1. facts of consumer complaint and developer's default. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. court's recognition of unfair terms and obligation. (Para 6 , 9)
3. outcome: orders for refund and compensation. (Para 10 , 12)

1. The present Consumer Complaint has been filed under S.21(a)(i) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short "the Act") by the Complainants, against the Opposite Party No. 1 M/s. Ireo Grace Realtech Private Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the 'Developer'), Opposite Party No. 2 Precision Realtors Private Limited, Opposite Party No. 3 Blue planet Infra developers Pvt. Ltd., Opposite Party No. 4 Madeira Conbuild Private Limited and Opposite Party No. 5 M/s. Global Estate, for refunding of money as the Opposite Party Developer failed to hand - over the possession of the Flat booked by them in the Project launched by the Developer in the name and style of "The Corridor ", within stipulated period.

2. According to the Complainants, the facts of the case are that in response to the Applications invited by the Opposite Party No. 1 Developer for allotment of flats in their upcoming Project, "The Corridors" (hereinafter referred to as the 'Project') located at Golf Course Extension Road, Sector - 67 - A, Tehsil & District Gurgaon, Haryana, the Complainants booked a residential flat in the Project by paying earnest money of 16,00,000 vide receipt No. 13211580 dated 16.3.2013. The Complainants were allotted Unit No. CD - A9-11-1102 having super area of 18,92.21 sq. ft. on 7.8.2013. Apartment Buyer's Agreement (hereinafter referred as the Agreement) was executed between the Parties. As per Clause 13.3 of the Agreement, the possession of the Unit was to be handed over within a period of 42 months from the date of approval of the building plans. Clause 13.3 of the Agreement reads as under:
"Subject to Force Majeure, as defined herein and further subject to the allottee having complied with all its obligations under the terms and conditions of this Agreement and not having defaulted under any provision(s) of this Agreement including but not limited to the timely payment of all dues and charges including the total Sale Consideration, registration charges, stamp duty and other charges and also subject to the Allottee having complied with all formalities or documentation as prescribed by the Company, the Company proposes to offer the possession of the said Apartment to the Allottee within a period of 42 (Forty Two) months from the date of approval of the Building Plans and / or fulfillment of the pre - conditions imposed thereunder ("Commitment period"). The Allottee further agrees and understands that the Company shall additionally be entitled to a period of 180 days ("Grace period"), after the expiry of the said Commitment Period to allow for unforeseen delays beyond the reasonable control of the Company."

3. The Complainants made payment of 2,11,87,810.59 (Rupees Two Crore Eleven Lacs Eighty Seven Thousand Eight Hundred Ten & Paisa Fifty Nine only) on different dates upto December 2016 against a total cost of 2,12,45,590.76ps., as per demand of the Opposite Party Developer, despite that the Opposite Party Developer could not complete the construction work at the Project within stipulated period and failed to deliver the possession of the Unit. The Opposite Party Developer sent Notice of Possession letter on 11.6.2019. However, after visiting the site, the Complainant found the Unite in not a habitable condition. Alleging deficiency in service and Unfair Trade Practice on the part of the Opposite Party Developer, the Complainants have filed the present Complaint with following prayer:
"(a) Directing the Opposite Parties to pay / refund a sum of 2,11,87,810.59 (Rupees Two crores eleven lacs eighty seven thousand eight hundred and paisa fifty nine only), paid by the Complainant towards the Unit No. CD - A9-11-1102 (Eleventh floor), Tower - A9 in Group Housing Colony situated at Sector - 67A, in the revenue Estate of Village Dhum








































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
whatsapp-icon Back to top