IN THE DELHI STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION Date of Institution: 05.06.2018 Date of Hearing: 09.01.2026 Date of Decision: 27.01.2026 COMPLAINT CASE NO.- 714/2018 IN THE MATTER OF:

MS. SUMAN AGRAWAL, THROUGH ITS ATTORNEY: MR. MANOJ KUMAR AGRAWAL, W/O SH. SANJAY KUMAR AGRAWAL R/O C-1, ANNAPURNA ENCLAVE, VIDYAPEETH ROAD, VARANASI-UP.

(Through: Mr. Rajesh Kumar Singla, Advocate)

…Complainant VERSUS

1. PARSVNATH DEVELOPERS LTD., REGD OFFICE: PARSVNATH TOWER, NEAR SHAHDARA METRO STATION, SHAHDARA, DELHI-110032.

ALSO AT:-

6^TH FLOOR, ARUNACHAL BUILDING, 19, BARAKHAMBA ROAD, NEW DELHI-110001.

2. SH. PARDEEP JAIN, CHAIRMAN, PARSVNATH DEVELOPERS LTD., 3. SH. SANJEEV JAIN, MANAGING DIRECTOR & C.E.O., PARSVNATH DEVELOPERS LTD., 4. RAJEEV JAIN, DIRECTOR MARKETING, PARSVNATH DEVELOPERS LTD., ALL AT:

REGD OFFICE: PARSVANATH TOWER, NEAR SHAHDARA METRO STATION, SHAHDARA, DELHI-110032. (Through: KNM & Partners)

…Opposite Parties CORAM:

HON’BLE JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL (PRESIDENT)

HON’BLE MS. BIMLA, MEMBER (FEMALE)

Present: Mr. Pranav Rajput, Counsel for the Complainant.

Mr. T.P. Chauhan, Ms. Tina Aneja and Mr. Yatharth Chugh, Counsel for the OP.

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

JUDGMENT

1. The present complaint being returned from the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-VI, vide its order dated 22.01.2018, on the ground of pecuniary jurisdiction, has been filed under Section 17 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, by the Complainant before this Commission alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practices by the Opposite Parties and has prayed the following reliefs:

“(1) Allow the present complaint and pass directions to the defendants to allot the plot of 500 square yards (aprox) in present project at Sonepat in favour of complainant and execute the sale-deed accordingly in the favour of complainant.

(2) Pass an order to pay a sum of Rs. 9,00,000/- with a future interest @ 18% p.a. on the same till the allotment of plot in favour of complainant.

(3) Any other relief which deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may also be granted to the complainant.”

2. Brief facts necessary for the adjudication of the present complaint are that in the year 2004, the Complainant booked a residential plot in respect of “Present and Future Project” to be developed in Sonepat, Haryana and vide ‘Advance Registration Form’ dated 22.09.2004 had applied for allotment of a Residential Plot and the Complainant had paid an amount of Rs. 2,75,500/- to the Opposite Parties towards the advance booking amount. Thereafter, the Complainant has made another payment of Rs. 7,24,500/- to the Opposite Parties as advance payment against the said plot.

3. Thereafter, the Complainant had sent repeated reminders and visited the office of Opposite Parties on several occasions requesting for the Allotment of the plot and to handover the possession of the plot but till date neither any allotment was made nor the details of the project was supplied by the Opposite Parties. The Complainant over the time had paid a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- to the Opposite Parties for the said Plot. However, the Opposite Parties kept extending the dates as per its own convenience and never gave any satisfactory response despite regular visits and correspondences. Aggrieved by the facts as stated above, the Complainant approached this Commission.

4. The Opposite Parties have contested the present case and raised preliminary objections as to the maintainability of the complaint case. The counsel of the Opposite Parties contended that the Complainant is not ‘consumer’ as defined under section 2(1)(d) of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 as she has invested money to earn profit, which amounts to commercial purpose. The counsel for the Opposite Parties further contended that the present complaint involves complicated question of facts and law, which cannot be adjudicated in a summary procedure before this Commission. Pressing the aforesaid objections, t