Compensation for delayed possession is mandated under contractual terms; jurisdiction limitations hinder claims based on past unfair trading allegations.

1. Heard Mr. Deepak Kr. Khushalani, Advocate, for the complainant and Mr. Rahul Ahuja, Advocate, for the opposite parties.

2. Above bunch of the complaints have been filed against same opposite parties in respect of same project "The Corridors". As the complainants, in these complaints pressed for the relief of possession at the time of arguments as such these complaints are decided together. For appreciating the controversy between the parties, the facts of CC / 111/2019 are mentioned in the judgment. Necessary facts of the complaints are given in a table below :

3. Marella Vijay Shekar has filed CC / 111/2019, for directing the opposite parties to (i) refund Rs.1,49,19,375.47 with interest @20% per annum from the date of respective deposit till the date of actual payment, or in alternative (ii) pay interest @ 20% per annum on the deposit of the complainant, from the date of each deposit till the date of handing over possession of Unit No. CD - C - 5-05-504, (iii) pay Rs.5,00,000, as compensation for mental agony and harassment and litigation cost; and (iv) any other relief which is deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case. At the time of arguments, the Counsel for the complainant pressed for the relief for possession, delayed compensation, dispensing with interest and holding charges.

4. In CC / 106/2019, the complainant has stated that the opposite parties were companies, registered under the Companies Act, 1956. They were engaged in the business of development and construction of group housing project and selling its unit to the prospective buyers. Opposite parties - 2 to 5 were the owners of the project land. Under a Collaboration Agreement dated 5.3.2013, between the opposite parties, the work of development, construction and sale etc. of the group housing project was assigned to IREO Grace Realtech Private Limited (the developer). The developer launched a group housing project, in the name of "The Corridors" at villages Dhumaspur and Maidwas, Golf Course Extension Road, Sector 67 - A, Gurgaon, in the year 2012 and made wide publicity of its facilities and amenities. The developer invited booking applications and started collecting money before grant of development licence. The complainant approached the developer and inquired in respect of the price of the flat. The developer informed that Rs.9,200 per sq.ft. as basic sale price the flat which includes one car parking space, Rs.327.91 per sq.ft. as Development Charges, Rs.100 per sq.ft. as Interest Free Maintenance Security, Rs.50 per sq.ft. as Interest Bearing Replacement Fund and Rs.2.5 lacs towards club membership charges (optional). The complainant and his brother Sameer Kumar Marella booked a 2BHK Flat on 20.3.2013 and deposited booking amount of Rs.14,50,000. Thereafter, the complainant deposited Rs.14,71,976 on 6.5.2013. The developer issued Allotment Offer Letter on 7.8.2013, allotting Unit No. CD - C5-05-504, super area 1540.42 sq.ft. and executed Apartment Buyer's Agreement on 11.7.2014. Annexure - IV of the agreement provides payment plan as "construction link payment plan". Clause - 13.3 provides 42 months period from the date of approval of building plan, for offer of possession, with grace period of 180 days. Clause 13.4 provides for delayed compensation @Rs. 7.5 per sq.ft. per month on super area after expiry of grace period. Sameer Kumar Marella surrendered his right in favour of the complainant, which was duly acknowledged by the developer on 12.5.2015. The complainant diligently followed payment plan and demand letter. The developer raised demand of 10th instalment payable on "completion of stone