IN THE DELHI STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION Date of Institution : 23.09.2016 Date of Reserving the order: 16.12.2024 Date of Decision: 24.01.2025 CC No. 1144/2016 IN THE MATTER OF Mr. Harminder Singh Saini S/o Mr. S. Manjit Singh Saini R/o 304, Tower-18, Orchid Petals, Sector-49, Sohna Road, Gurgaon-122001 (Through: Mr. Mr. M.S. Saini, Advocate)

..…Complainant VERSUS

1. Paramount Towers Pvt. Ltd.

2. Paramount Propbuild Pvt. Ltd.

(an amalgamated company of Paramount Towers Pvt. Ltd.)

(Through its Directors)

Both At: 208, Second Floor, Sikka Mansion LSC, Sarita Vihar, Delhi-110092 (Through: Mr. Sartak Pandey, Advocate)

..…Opposite Parties CORAM:

HON‟BLE MS. BIMLA KUMARI, PRESIDING MEMBER Present: Mr. M.S. Saini, counsel for Complainant Mr. Sartak Pandey, counsel for OPs PER: HON‟BLE MS. BIMLA KUMARI, PRESIDING MEMBER

JUDGMENT

1. Brief facts of the case are that, on

17.03.2012, the complainant and his wife, namely, Mrs Gurjeet Kaur, had jointly applied for allotment of apartment in the upcoming project of the opposite parties, namely, „Paramount Floraville‟ Sector 137, Expressway Noida. The complainant paid an amount of Rs.4,58,455/- to the opposite parties vide cheque bearing no. 887940 dated 16 March 2012, towards the advance booking amount. Vide Allotment Letter dated 27.03.2012, the opposite parties allotted the apartment bearing no. 1502, 15th Floor admeasuring 1045 sq. ft. to the complainant, in the aforesaid project. As per Allotment Letter, the total sale price of the said apartment was Rs.44,69,465/-. As per Allotment Letter, the possession of the said apartment was to be delivered within 18 months from the date of issuance of this allotment letter.

2. It is the case of complainant that the time for handing over the possession of the apartment was expired in October 2013. However, the opposite parties delayed the construction of the project for more than two years. As and when, he tried to contact the representatives of the opposite parties, they failed to give any satisfactory reply. Finally, the opposite parties sent a letter dated 23.03.2015 by which it was informed that they would deliver the possession of unit very soon and the finishing work of the unit would take approx 30 to 45 days and the final cleaning of the unit would be done only after clearing of all dues by the complainant.

3. It is the further case of complainant that after receipt of the said letter, he cleared all the dues, as per the time schedule. Thereafter, on 22.06.2015, he visited the apartment in question, wherein he was shocked to see that that no such finishing work was done in the apartment as specified by the opposite parties in the letter dated 23.03.2015. Thus, he immediately wrote letter dated 25.06.2015 to the Marketing Manager of the opposite parties and asked for the actual date for handing over the possession of the apartment. But, the opposite parties did not give any reply.

4. It is the further case of complainant that on

26.02.2016, he paid stamp duty of Rs.2,38,500/- to Advocate Mr. Luv Mohan Gupta, engaged by the opposite parties for registration of lease deed of the said apartment, but there was no response from the opposite parties either regarding the registration of the lease deed or the possession of flat. The opposite parties without even getting the sub lease deed registered, charged the maintenance charges for two years and one year advance water charges totaling to the tune of Rs.58,719.28.

5. It is the further case of complainant that he suffered a lot in the hands of the opposite parties because he was paying heavy installments for the bank loan, which he had taken towards the said apartment and on the other hand, he was paying rent for the accommodation. The opposite parties not only delayed in giving the possession of the apartment, even after clearance of all dues but also harassed and mentally tortured the complainant as he was not able to take Income Tax Rebate on the interest, paid by him on the loan advanced fro