NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION NEW DELHI FIRST APPEAL NO. NC/FA/681/2016 (Against the Order dated 11th May 2016 in Complaint No. 19/2013 of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Bihar)

WITH NC/IA/11418/2025 (CONDONATION OF DELAY)

DR. DHANANJAY KUMAR SUMAN PRESENT ADDRESS - S/O LATE SH. PRASASH PASWAN, FLAT NO.103, BIRENDRA RESIDENCY, ROAD NO.12, RAJENDRA NAGAR, PATNA-800016 , PATNA,BIHAR.

.......Appellant(s)

Versus M/S. FRIENDLIES ESTATE ESSENTIALS PVT. LIMITED & 2 ORS.

PRESENT ADDRESS - THROUGH ITS DIRECTOR VINAY KUMAR SINHA, ITS OFFICE AT PATLIPUTRA PATH, RAJENDRA NAGAR, P.S. KADAMKUAN, DISTT./ TOWNPATNA-800016 , SH. VINAY KUMAR SINHA PRESENT ADDRESS - DIRECTOR MS FRIENDLIES ESTATE ESSENTIALS PRIVATE LTD ITS OFFICE AT PATLIPUTRA PATH RAJENDRA NAGAR PS KADAMKUAN DISTTTOWNPATNA-

800016 , PATNA,BIHAR.

SH. AJAY KUMAR S/O SH. RAM NARESH SINGH, PRESENT ADDRESS - RESIDENT OF MOHALLA- BHABHA COLONY, HANUMAN NAGAR, P.S. -PATRAKAR NAGARPATNA-800020 , .......Respondent(s)

BEFORE:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDIP AHLUWALIA , PRESIDING MEMBER HON'BLE DR. SADHNA SHANKER , MEMBER FOR THE APPELLANT:

MR. SANJEEV KR. VERMA, ADVOCATE IN FA/476/2016 MR. ABHYANAND SINGH, ADVOCATE IN FA/681/2016 FOR THE RESPONDENT:

MR. VIVEK SINGH, ADVOCATE FOR R-1 (VC)

DATED: 11/02/2026

ORDER

JUSTICE SUDIP AHLUWALIA, MEMBER These Appeals have been filed against the impugned Orders dated 29.03.2016, 11.05.2016 and 03.05.2016 in Complaint Nos. 02/2013, 19/2013 and 17/2013 respectively, passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Bihar, vide which, the Complainants were directed to pay additional amounts towards the Flats.

2. The facts and question of law involved in these Appeals are similar in all material particulars. Therefore these Appeals are being disposed of by this common Order. However, for the sake of convenience, FA/476/2016 is treated as the lead case and the facts enumerated hereinafter are extracted from the Complaint therein.

3. The factual background, in brief, is that the Opposite Party No. 1/ Respondent No. 1 is the Builder Company, and the Opposite Party No. 2 and 3/ Respondent No. 2 and 3 are its Directors. The land on which the project “Prabha Twin Towers” was developed is family property of the Opposite Party No. 2, who entered into an arrangement with family members for construction of the said Apartment Complex. The Flat booked by the Complainant/Appellant was Flat No. 3-D, 3rd Floor in Block B. Upon being informed that the outer construction was nearly complete and only a few flats remained, the Complainant finalized the said Flat at a cost of Rs. 24,00,000/-, with an estimated Rs. 3-4 lakhs towards additional charges. An Agreement for Sale dated 04.11.2009 was executed and registered, and Rs. 19,00,000/- was paid in instalments, of which Rs. 13,00,000/- was paid directly and Rs. 6,00,000/- was paid via HDFC Bank towards a sanctioned loan of Rs. 10,00,000/-. It was stipulated in the Agreement that possession would be handed over within two years and that the total price was fixed, with no escalation except for genuine additional charges like parking, transformer, sewage, etc.

4. Despite repeated follow-ups and the passage of over a decade, possession was not handed over, and the Flat remained incomplete with no water, electricity, or toilet facilities. The Builder further demanded Rs. 27,00,000/- in cash beyond the agreed amount and refused to accept the final amount of Rs. 5,00,000/- by cheque. The Complainant also received vague, undated Notices from the Opposite Party No.3, threatening arbitrary revision of the Flat’s cost, unsubstantiated by the agreement terms. Legal Notices sent by the Complainant on multiple dates went unserved with the remark “nobody available to receive”. It was later revealed by HDFC Bank that further loan disbursement was withheld due to litigation between the Builder and a third party, M/s. Blue Heavens Agro Pvt. Ltd., challenging the Builder’s right over the property. This was not communic