The Consumer Protection Commission has jurisdiction to rule on complaints despite force majeure claims if the consumer's rights are violated.

1. The present Consumer Complaint (CC) has been filed under S.21(a)(i) of the Consumer Protection Act,1986 (for short ˜the Act) by the Complainant against Opposite parties (OPs) as detailed above, inter alia praying for:
(i) To direct OPs to jointly and severally refund the principle amount with simple interest @18% p.a. from the respective dates of deposit till the date of realization together with compensation of Rs. 1,00,000 and costs Rs. 25,000.
(ii) Any other relief as this commission may deem fit.

2. Notice was issued to OPs, giving them 45 days time to file written statement. Written statement was filed by OPs.

3. It is averred in the Complaint that:
(i) The OPs are companies incorporated under the provisions of Companies Act, 1956. The OPs act through their common Directors Mr. Arvind Walia and Mr. Sandeep Yadav. The OPs are collectively owners of approx. 60.5112 acres of contagious land, situated in Haryana. OPs entered into a joint development agreement dated 29.11.2011 to jointly develop portion of the project land in to a group housing complex in the name of Rise. OP - 1 and OP - 2 had irrevocably constituted OP - 3 as their Power of Attorney holder vide Deed of Power of Attorney dated 9.6.2011 for submitting applications to various authorities in connection with the sanctioning, development, construction and completion of development schedule. OP - 1 was empowered by the other OPs to advertise for the project and to receive money from the Allottees / Buyers. The OPs act through common Directors and doing joint venture, thus are liable to be jointly treated as one for the purpose of this complaint.
(ii) The complainant booked a residential apartment with the OPs in a project named ˜Rise which the OPs were to develop in Sector 37 - D of Gurgaon. After allotment of a residential apartment bearing No. C - 902 having super area of 1765 sq.ft. to the Complainant the parties executed an Apartment Buyers agreement (ABA) on 31.5.2013, incorporating their respective obligations in respect of the said transaction. As per ABA, the possession was proposed to be handed over to the complainant by September 2015. The grievance of the Complainant is that the possession has not been offered to him by the OPs constituting deficiency of service, unfair trade practices, restrictive trade practices etc. on their part despite he having paid Rs. 48,99,026 out of the agreed sale consideration of Rs. 82,42,680
(iii) On 25.1.2017, Complainant wrote to OPs detailing her grievances to which OPs did not respond. The OP - 1 vide letter dated 12.4.2017 invited the Complainant to make alleged balance payment of Rs. 26,73,985 which included interest charge of Rs. 7,23,341 and further stated that this payment should be made within 15 days to avoid any further charges. This demand of OPs is completely unjustified as they have drastically delayed the construction of the flat and failed to adhere to the schedule.
(iv) On 25.10.2018, owing to acts and omissions of OPs, the Complainant sent a legal asking OPs to refund Rs. 48,15,945 towards principle and up to date interest thereon from the date of respective deposits made by the Complainant till actual payment made by the OPs. However OPs never paid anything and never replied to this notice.
(v) That OPs have failed to deliver the possession on time and hence the Complainant is eligible for the refund along with reasonable interest on the amount from all the OPs as they are jointly liable towards the Complainant.
(vi) The Complainant cited judgement of this Commission, bearing CC No. 2524 of 2017, in which it was held that if seller is charging interest from the buyer @ 18% p.a., we should have no hesitatio