The Consumer Protection Act applies to real estate transactions protecting consumers from deficiencies in service, affirming the State Commission's jurisdiction.

1. This Appeal has been filed by M/s. Rockline Construction Co. (hereinafter referred to as the Builder / Developer), Opposite Party No.2 in the Complaint, against the Order dated 10.10.2012, passed by the Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission at Mumbai (hereinafter referred to as the State Commission) in Consumer Complaint No. CC / 11/91, whereby the State Commission had allowed the Complaint and directed the Complainants to make balance payment of Rs.49,68,250 to the Builder / Developer, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of the said Order or to deposit the said amount in the State Commission if the Builder / Developer refuse to accept the said amount. Thereafter, the Builder / Developer was directed to deliver the vacant and peaceful possession of Flat No. 1509, having carpet area admeasuring 1036 sq. ft., Royal Heights, Lokhandwala, Off Link Road, Near Milat Nagar, Andheri (West), Mumbai - 400058 and to execute the Agreement for Sale within a period of six weeks from the date of deposit of the amount by the Complainants. Further, bearing in mind the fact that the Project was going on from the year 2005 and in case it was not complete, the Builder / Developer was directed to complete the construction in respect of the Flat in question within six months and deliver the habitable possession thereof along with execution of the documents, as directed above. The Builder / Developer was also directed to pay the a sum of Rs.25,000 by way of costs of the Complainants.

2. It may be mentioned here that vide Order dated 8.11.2017 passed by this Commission, RNA Builders (NG), Opposite Party No.1 in the Complaint and Respondent No.3 herein, stated to be a sister - concern of the Builder / Developer, was deleted from the Array of Parties on the request of learned Counsel for the Builder / Developer and, therefore, the present proceedings revolve around the Builder / Developer and the Complainants.

3. The facts, in brief, are that the Complainants had booked a Flat in the aforesaid Project of the Builder / Developer on 22.7.2005. While the total sale consideration of the Flat as stated in the Allotment Letter dated 1.2.2006 was Rs.58,45,000, the Complainants had paid an amount of Rs.8,76,750 as part - consideration and the balance amount was to be paid as per progress of the Project. Due to some reasons, the Project was delayed and on 7.2.2008 the Builder / Developer gave an option to the Complainants either to collect the part - consideration paid with statutory interest or to continue with the Project, in which case the Builder / Developer shall not be responsible to pay any interest on the amount paid towards part - consideration. The Complainants decided to continue with the Project. vide their letter dated 17.1.2010 the Complainants enquired about the progress of the work, whereupon vide letter dated 2.2.2010 the Builder / Developer informed them that their provisional booking stood cancelled and denied that the Project work was stalled or was not in progress at any time. In the said factual matrix, alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the Builder / Developer, the afore - noted Complaint was filed by the Complainants before the State Commission, praying for the reliefs stated therein.

4. Upon notice by the State Commission, the Builder / Developer contested the Complaint by filing its Written Version. While stating that RNA Builders (NG) is their sister - concern, it was contended on behalf of the Builder / Developer that the Complainants were investors and the allotment made in their favour was terminated on 7.2.2008 b