IN THE DELHI STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION Date of Institution: 03.08.2022 Date of Hearing: 17.01.2025 Date of Decision: 05.03.2025 COMPLAINT CASE NO.- 121/2022 IN THE MATTER OF

1. MS. AMANDEEP KAUR., W/O MR. KAPIL JAIN, 2. MR. KAPIL JAIN, S/O MR. TARSEM LAL JAIN, BOTH RESIDING AT:

R/O H. NO. H-1260, GALI NO.-3, JAWAHAR NAGAR, MOGA, PUNJAB-142001.

(Through: PSP Legal, Advocates and Solicitors)

…Complainants VERSUS M/S BPTP LIMITED, THROUGH ITS DIRECTOR, 28, ECE HOUSE, FIRST FLOOR, K.G. MARG, NEW DELHI-110001.

(Through: CPS Legal, Advocates & Solicitors)

…Opposite Party CORAM:

HON’BLE JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL (PRESIDENT)

HON’BLE MS. PINKI, MEMBER (JUDICIAL)

Present: Ms. Raveena Paniker, Counsel for the complainant (Enrl. No.

D/6089/2022, Email: raveenapanikerpspledge@gmail.com).

Mr. Mohit Yadav, Counsel for the OP (Enrl. No. D/7767/18, Email: arun.prakash@pbtp.com, info@,cpslegal.in).

Mr. Arun Prakash, AR of the OP.

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 and delay in handing over of possession by the Opposite party and has prayed the following reliefs:

“(a) Direct the Opposite Party, for an immediate 100% refund of the total amount paid by the Complainants along with a penal interest @18% per annum from the date of receipt of payments made to the Opposite Party;

b) Direct the Opposite Party to pay compensation of Rs. 2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakh Only) to the Complainants for mental agony, harassment, discomfort and undue hardships caused to the Complainants as a result of the above acts and omissions on the part of the Opposite Party;

c) Direct the Opposite Party to pay a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) to the Complainants towards litigation costs;

d) That any other and further relief in favour of the Complainants as the Hon'ble Commission may deem fit and proper in the fact and circumstances of the case.”

2. Brief facts necessary for the adjudication of the present complaint are that the Complainants vide application dated 20.02.2014, booked a unit in the project named “Pedestal Floors” of the Opposite Party, situated at Sector 70A, Gurgaon, Haryana, by paying a booking amount of Rs.12,00,000/-. Subsequently, the Opposite Party vide allotment letter dated 09.04.2014, allotted Unit No. C-15-FF, admeasuring 1,857 sq. ft., to the Complainants. Thereafter, a floor buyer agreement was executed between the parties on 17.06.2014. As per Clause 1.4 of the said agreement, the Opposite Party was to offer possession of the said unit within a period of 36 months from the date of execution of the floor buyer agreement. However, the Opposite Party has neither offered the possession of the unit nor handed over the possession of the said unit till date.

3. Further, the Complainants opted for a payment plan under a subvention scheme, as per which, after financing the said unit through Housing Development Finance Corporation (HDFC), the Opposite Party was to make the payment of the Pre-EMI to HDFC until the offer of possession of the said unit. Accordingly, HDFC sanctioned a loan amounting to Rs.1,11,26,817/- and a tripartite agreement dated 20.06.2014 was executed between the Complainants, the Opposite Party, and HDFC. Moreover, the Opposite Party assured the Complainants that the liability towards payment of Pre-EMI to the bank would be borne solely by them until the possession of the said unit. The Opposite Party also acknowledged the same in its letter dated 20.06.2014 and emails dated

04.11.2015 and 21.11.2016.

4. The Complainants diligently followed the payment plan and made a payment of Rs. 1,20,67,756/- as and when demanded by the Opposite Party. However, the Opposite Party failed to fulfill its contractual obligation to pay the Pre-EMI to the bank. Therefore, the Complainants raised their grievance with the Opposite Party. In response, the Opposite Party sent an email dated 22.12.2016 s