Delays in possession of real estate mandate full refund to consumers under the Consumer Protection Act.

1. This is a complaint under S.21(a)(i) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 filed by the complainant seeking refund of the amount deposited in respect of the flat booked by them with the opposite parties in a project promoted and developed by the opposite parties along with penal interest and other compensation, alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on account of the delay in handing over possession of the flat.

2. In brief, the facts of the case are that the complainant had booked a flat in the project The Corridors promoted and developed by the Opposite parties viz. Ireo Grace Realtech Pvt. Ltd. located on Golf Course Extension Road, Sector 67 A, Gurgaon, Haryana on 28.2.2013 for their residential purpose. An allotment letter was issued by the opposite party to the complainant on 7.8.2013 allotting flat No. CD - C10 “ 07 - \704 in Tower C 10, admeasuring 1,300 sq ft in the above said project for a total sale consideration of Rs. 1,28,31,283. The complainant deposited Rs. 1,26,03,836 towards this flat by way of various instalments. Thereafter, an Apartment Buyer's Agreement (in short ˜the ABA') was entered into between the complainant and the opposite party on 14.4.2014. As per Clause 13.3 of the ABA, the opposite party committed to offer possession of the flat within 42 months with an additional grace period of six months, i.e. by 23.7.2017 failing which compensation at the rate of Rs. 7.50 per sq foot was promised by the opposite party to the complainant. However, possession of the said flat was not offered by the opposite party till the date of filing of the present complaint. Hence, the complainant has approached this Commission alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice by the opposite party in not adhering to the committed date of handing over possession and imposing entirely one sided conditions in the ABAthat are in favour of the opposite party which the complainant as a consumer was unable to contest and was compelled to accept. The complainant has sought full refund of the deposited amount and other reliefs and is before us with the following prayer:
(a) Direct the opposite party (s) jointly or severally, for an immediate 100% refund of the total amount of Rs. 1,26,03,836 paid by the complainant, along with a penal interest of 18% per annum from the date of the receipt of the payments made to the opposite party(s).
(b) Direct the opposite party(s) jointly or severally to pay compensation of Rs. 5.00 lakh to the complainant for mental agony, harassment, discomfort and undue hardships caused to the complainant as a result of the above acts and omissions on the part of the opposite party;
(c) Direct the opposite party(s) jointly and severally, to pay a sum of Rs. 1.00 lakh to the complainant as a whole, towards litigation costs; and
(d) That any other and further relief in favour of the complainant as the Hon'ble Commission may deem fit and proper in the fact and circumstances of the case.

3. The opposite party has contested the complaint by way of reply and evidence by way of affidavit. The contention of the learned Counsel for the opposite party is that the earnest moneyd eposited by the complainant was forfeited as the booking of the apartment was cancelled in accordance with the terms and conditions set out in the booking application form on account of default in payments. The complaint filed before this Commission is premature as the period of 48 months needs to be calculated with effect from 27.11.2014, the date on which the fire safety scheme was approved. He further states that this Commission has no jurisdiction under the CPAct, 1986 to amend / modify / re -