Forfeiture of earnest money must be reasonable; 10% of basic sale price upheld as valid.

1. Heard Mr. Saurabh Suman Sinha, Advocate, for the complainants and Mr. Rahul Ahuja, Advocate, for the opposite party.

2. Saurav Sanyal and Jayanta Sanyal have filed above complaint for directing M/s. IREO Pvt. Ltd. (i) for declaring letter dated 6.6.2016, terminating the allotment of the complainants and forfeiting earnest money, as illegal, (ii) to refund Rs. 93,90,150 with interest @18% per annum, from the date of deposit till the date of payment, (iii) to pay Rs. 10,00,000 as compensation for mental agony and harassment, (iv) to pay Rs. 2 lacs, as the cost of litigation and (v) Any other relief which is deemed fit and proper, in the facts and circumstances.

3. The facts, as stated in the complaint and emerged from the documents attached with it, are that the opposite party (the developer) was a company, incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 and engaged in the business of development and construction of residential and commercial buildings and selling its unit to the prospective buyers. In the year 2011, the developer launched a project of group housing in the name of “The Grand Arch” at Golf Course Extension Road, Sector - 58, district Gurgaon. The complainants were looking for a residential flat in that locality and they were attracted with the presentation of the developer. The complainants booked a flat, in this project and were allotted Flat No. - F - 1-202 (area 2,156 sq.ft., basic sale price of Rs. 2,87,07140 and total sale price of Rs. 3,02,94,816) by an allotment letter dated 19.12.2014. According to the payment plan, 10% of the basic sale price had to be paid at the time of allotment and 20% of the basic sale price and 50% of the other charges had to be paid within 50 days of the booking and remaining amount had to be paid at the time of possession. The complainants deposited Rs.9390150 and Apartment buyer’s Agreement was executed in their favour on 12.2.2015. The developer obtained “Occupation Certificate” on 17.12.2015 and issued notice of possession dated 23.12.2015, requiring the complainants to complete the formalities of documentation and paying balance amount of Rs. 2,19,12,325 as basic sale price, Rs. 20,09,500 as stamp duty charges, Rs. 2,15,600 in favour of Grand Arch Resident Welfare Association, Rs. 2,39,305, in favour of Quick Real Estate Pvt. Ltd., Rs. 6,000, in favour of Sakha Services Private Ltd. and Rs. 2,21,337 in favour of Salvato India, on or before 22.1.2016. The complainants visited the office of the developer on 28.12.2015 and found that construction work was going on but the officers gave assurance that it would be completed before 22.1.2016. The complainant approached Citibank for grant of loan, from where loan of Rs. 90,00,000 was sanctioned on 16.2.2016, for which a tripartite agreement dated 24.2.2016 was executed. Citicorp Finance (India) Limited sanctioned loan of Rs. 1,00,00,000 on 2.3.2016. However, the construction was not complete in all respect, the complainants asked the developer to complete the construction and then payment would be done as at that time water leakage was found in master bedroom & bathroom and guest bedroom & bathroom, number of stones were broken in the flooring of living room, double glazed window glass was broken and Interior not having been painted or polished. The complainants apprised the builder about the defects vide email dated 18.2.2016. The complainants requested the developer to extend time for deposit of the money till the completion of the construction. The developer, vide letter dated 6.4.2016, gave last opportunity to the complainants to deposit the amount of Rs. 2,46,04,067 along with delayed interest and holding charges within