IN THE DELHI STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION Date of Institution: 06.04.2017 Date of hearing: 22.08.2022 Date of Decision: 22.11.2022 COMPLAINT CASE NO.- 668/2017 IN THE MATTER OF

1. MR. HEMANT CHOPRA, S/O LATE MR. SURENDER CHOPRA

2. BALDEV RAJ CHOPRA (SINCE DECEASED), THROUGH ITS LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES

2(a) MS. SUDHA CHOPRA, W/O LATE MR. BALDEV RAJ CHOPRA

2(b) MS. RASHMA GROVER, W/O MR. SANJAY GROVER

2(c) MS. SONIA, W/O MR. RAHUL D/O LATE MR. BALDEV RAJ CHOPRA

2(d) MR. RAKESH CHOPRA, S/O LATE MR. BALDEV RAJ CHOPRA.

(Through: Mr. Gaurav Malhotra, Advocate)

…Complainants VERSUS TDI INFRASTRUCTURES PVT. LTD., (FORMERLY IN TIME PROMOTERS PVT. LTD.), REGISTERED OFFICE AT:

9, K.G. MARG, NEW DELHI-110001 ALSO AT:

UPPER GROUND FLOOR, VANDNA BUILDING, 11, TOLSTOY MARG, NEW DELHI-110001.

(Through: Mr. Ankit Khera, Advocate)

…Opposite Party CORAM:

HON’BLE JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL (PRESIDENT)

HON’BLE MS. PINKI, MEMBER (JUDICIAL)

Present: None for the Parties.

PER: HON’BLE JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL (PRESIDENT)

JUDGMENT

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

a) The opposite parties/respondents be directed to refund the amount of Rs 28,82,687/- (Rupees Twenty Eight Lakh Eighty Two Thousand Six Hundred Eighty Seven) along with interest @18% per annum on the said amount from the date of payment to the opposite party till the payment is refunded to the complainants;

b) The respondents be directed to pay compensation of Rs

10,00,000/- Lakh (Rupees Ten Lakh Only) to my client jointly/severely for the mental and physical harassment, torture for the agony caused to the complainant;

c) The respondent be further burdened with the cost of litigation, d) Any other relief which this Hon’ble forum may deem fit in the given facts and circumstances of the case be granted in favour of the complainant and against the respondent.

2. Brief facts for the adjudication of the present complaint are that the Complainants booked a flat, in Project of Opposite Party namely “TDI City” situated at Kundli, Sonepat for a total price of Rs.30,83,937/-. Thereafter, the Complainants were allotted a plot no. J-257” of 350 Sq. yards. A Plot Buyer Agreement was executed between the parties on 24.05.2007.

3. The Complainants had paid a total sum of Rs.28,82,687/- as demanded by the Opposite Party till date. Thereafter, the Complainants requested the Opposite Party to give the date of delivery of the said plot but was no avail. On visiting the site by the Complainants, they found that Opposite Party did not start the construction work in the said project till 2013.

4. The Complainants sent letter dated 05.07.2013 to the Opposite Party vide which they asked the Opposite Party to give the possession of the plot but the Opposite Party failed to pay any heed towards the requests of the Complainants. Aggrieved by the aforesaid, Complainants served legal notice dated 26.08.2016 and requested Opposite Party to refund the amount of Rs.28,82,687/- paid by the Complainants towards the purchase of plot along with interest but of no avail.

5. The Opposite Party has contested the present case and raised preliminary objections as to the maintainability of the complaint case. The counsel for the Opposite Party submitted that Complainants are not a „consumer‟ under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 as the Complainants have invested the money to earn profits, which amounts to commercial purpose. The counsel for the Opposite Party submitted that the Complainants defaulted in making due payments as per the payment plan opted by the Complainants moreover; the delay caused in completing the development of the said plot was due to some unavoidable circumstances. Pressing the aforesaid objections, the counsel appearing on behalf of the Opposite Party prayed that the complaint should be dismissed.

6. The Complainants have filed their Rejoinder rebutting the writt