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

2023 Supreme(Online)(Del) 18798

NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, NEW DELHI
Chairperson, CJ
Lal Lakhiani v. Puri Construction Private Limited
Consumer Complaint No. 1087 of 2019 | Consumer Complaint No. 1088 of 2019



Consumer complaints against builders for delays in possession must be resolved by allowing refunds without penalty or interest when construction is not completed as per agreement.

Headnote:(A) Consumer Protection Act, 1986 - Consumer Complaints against builders for delayed possession and deficiency in service - Complainants entitled to refund without penalty or interest if they opt out of possession, or timely delivery if they accept - Delay of only 10 months deemed not unreasonable, and compensation ordered. (Paras 11, 12)

(B) Deficiency in Services - OPs accused of unfair trade practices by mortgaging property, failure to complete construction, and not regularly responding to buyers - Entitlements clearly defined under the Agreement and Consumer Protection Act must be observed. (Paras 3, 11)

Facts of the case:
Complaints regarding delayed possession of flats purchased in Emerald Bay project, with 97% payments made but construction incomplete. Allegations of fraud due to project mortgaging and misrepresentation of OP’s capacity as a colonizer under relevant Haryana laws.

Findings of Court:
Delay in possession was justified but remedies and compensation due to complainants outlined; options to accept possession or seek a refund were established, with specifics on interest and penalties clearly set (i.e., no penalties for refunds, 6% interest on delays).

Issues: Determining whether the complaint was maintainable, whether the OPs had breached their contract, the status of possession offers, and the validity of consumer definitions under the circumstances.

Ratio Decidendi: The court affirmed that OP failed to fulfil obligations in a timely manner and established a precedent for consumer rights against builders. Complainants are viewed as justified in their recourse for both possession or refunds.

Result: OPs directed to facilitate possession or process refunds as stipulated.

Table of Content
1. consumer complaints arise from breaches related to construction and service delivery. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. ops' alleged failure in providing timely information and delivery obligations. (Para 4 , 8)
3. resolution on whether complainants should receive possession or full refunds. (Para 10 , 11 , 12)

1. The present Consumer Complaints (CCs) have been filed by the Complainants against the opposite parties as detailed above, inter aila praying for directing the OPs to:
(i) refund of principal amount with interest @ 18% p.a.
(ii) compensation for harassment, mental pain and agony suffered and sustained by the complainants.
(iii) litigation cost.



2. Since the facts and question of law involved and the reliefs prayed for in these complaints are similar / identical and against the same Opposite Parties except for minor variations in the dates, events and flat numbers etc., which are summarized in the Table in para 6 below, these complaints are being disposed off by this common order. However, for the sake of convenience, Consumer Complaint (CC) No. 1087 of 2019 is treated as the lead case and facts enumerated herein under are taken from CC / 1087/2019.

3. It is averred / stated in the complaint that:
(i) The brother of Complainant No.1, namely, Shri Mohan C. Lakhiani and other family members (original allottees), bought flat in the in the Project launched by the OP namely, "Emerald Bay" situated in Sector 104, Village Dhanwapur, Tehsil & District Gurgaon, Haryana. Upon making requisite payment the original allottees were allotted Apartment No. 1803, having super area of 1700 sq.ft. on the 18th Floor of Tower No. B - 1 (Unit). On 16.9.2013, the original allottees, OP - 1 and the Complainants made the necessary endorsement in the Builder Buyer Agreement, whereby the OP - 1 approved the nomination of the Complainants in place of the original allottees. On 12.2.2014, the original allotees executed a Transfer Deed in favour of the present Complainants, whereby the right title and interest in the Unit was transferred to the complainants. The total consideration for the Unit was Rs.1,70,90,711, out of which, the complainants paid Rs.1,66,62,514 to OP - 1 between 2013-2015. The OPs were liable to handover the possession of the Apartment within 48 months from the date of Agreement, i.e. by 29.10.2017.
(ii) The complainants paid 97% of the total consideration amount as demanded by the OP - 1 from time to time expecting that construction of the apartment will be completed on time. But the complainants came to know that the construction of the Unit is still not complete, even after a lapse of such a long time.
(iii) After receiving 97% of the total sale consideration for the apartments from most of the allottees, OPs have, without informing these allottees (including the Complainants), mortgaged the entire project including land and structures constructed or to be constructed thereon on first exclusive charge basis in favour of PNB Housing Finance Limited. The said mortgage has been effected to secure a Loan of Rupees Hundred Crores as per Loan Agreement signed between the OPs and PNB Housing Finance Ltd. This act of OPs has further made the position of all the alloteess of the Project (including the complainants) vulnerable with respect to the legal title of the apartment despite having paid 78% of the total sale consideration amount for the apartment. The OP - 1 filed Form No. CGH - 1 with the Registrar of Companies on 2.5.2016. As per the terms of the Loan Agreement, the repayment is to be done in 18 equated monthly instalments with a moratorium period of 12 months from the first disbursement made by PNB Housing Finance Ltd. around April 2016. The said clause clearly makes it evident that the OPs do not have the intention to offer the possession of apartments and get the registration done in favour of the allottees any time soon. It further came to the knowledge of the complainants that OP - 1 has further raised hundreds of crores of ru











































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