JUDGMENT

1. The present complaint has been filed by the Complainants before this commission alleging deficiency of service on the part of the Opposite Party and has prayed the following reliefs:

a) “Cancel the allotment of flat and refund Rs.5134910 with accrued interest @18% p.a. from 08/04/2013 (i.e. the date of booking) till the amount is finally paid, b) Pay compensation for mental and physical harassment amounting to Rs 10,00,000/-, c) Pay Compensation for unfair trade practice and deficiency in service amounting to Rs 5,00,000/-

d) Pay Litigation cost amounting to Rs 1,00,000/-

e) Pass such other order(s), as this Hon'ble Commission may kindly deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances and pleadings of this case, in the interest of justice to the Complainants.”

2. Brief facts necessary for the adjudication of the present complaint are that the Complainants bought a residential property in 2013, influenced by the advertisement issued in various newspapers by the Opposite Party for the “WATERSIDE FLOORS” in the TDI Lake Groove City, at Kundli, Dist.: Sonipat, Haryana. Consequently, they were allotted an independent floor tentatively numbered as No. WF134/TF in the project through an allotment letter dated 04.09.2013 with a built-up area of approximately 1400 sq. ft., a 3BHK flat proposed to be situated on the 3rd floor. The Complainant booked a floor by paying booking amount of Rs. 5,00,000/- as a booking amount vide Cheque No. 310251 dated 18.04.2013. The Opposite Party issued a Receipt for the booking amount vide Receipt No. 0002113 dated

01.05.2013.

3. The complainants proceeded with 2-3 installment payments before signing a Floor Buyers Agreement. Despite their insistence on signing the agreement first, the Opposite Party delayed but eventually sent a heavily one-sided agreement in September 2013. When the complainants objected, the Opposite Party threatened forfeiture of 15% of the flat's cost as earnest money if they did not sign, forcing the complainants to comply under duress. The Floor Buyers Agreement specified an approximate super area of 1400 sq. ft., comprising three bedrooms, two toilets, a drawing/dining room, a kitchen, and balconies on the third floor. The project was to be completed within 30 months from the date of execution of the Agreement. Delays attributable to the Opposite Party would result in a penalty of Rs. 5 per sq.

ft. per month. The basic sale price was Rs. 49,00,000/- with a total sale consideration of Rs. 54,50,690/- inclusive of EDC and IDC.

4. The Opposite Party has not been able to offer possession or obtain a 'Completion Certificate,' indicating the project is incomplete, despite nearly nine years passing since the booking/allotment. The Opposite Party’s offer of possession for fit-outs is deemed fraudulent and not legally tenable. The complainants paid a total of Rs. 51,34,910/-, confirmed by the Opposite Party in a communication dated 01.06.2021. The Opposite Party repeatedly provided misleading and false assurances regarding project completion. The complainants observed slow or no progress during site visits. When they requested a cancellation and a refund with interest, the Opposite Party offered empty promises and failed to provide any solutions.

5. In a letter dated 01.06.2021, the Opposite Party unilaterally and arbitrarily increased the final cost of the flat to Rs. 65,30,394/- citing an unexplained increase in the area from 1400 sq. ft. to 1520 sq. ft. (an 8.57% increase). This increase was imposed without justification, consent, or plausible explanation. The Opposite Party’s conduct, including the inordinate delay in possession and arbitrary price increase, amounts to unfair trade practices and deficiency in service.

6. The Opposite Party contends that the complainants' case is without merit and should be dismissed on several grounds. Firstly, the COVID-19 pandemic caused significant delays in construction due to lockdowns and labour shortages, despite the Opposite Party’s effo