IN THE DELHI STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION Date of Institution: 20.04.2018 Date of reserving the order: 23.12.2025 Date of Decision: 12.02.2026 COMPLAINT CASE NO.- 484/2018 IN THE MATTER OF MR. NARENDER KUMAR S/O MR. LACHMAN DAS R/O H. NO. 394/3, ROSHANPURA, GURGAON, HARYANA-122001 …Complainant (Through: Mr. Abhishek Sharma, Advocate M. No. 9910982789)

VERSUS COSMOS INFRA ENGINEERING (INDIA) PVT.LTD.

THROUGH AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY REGD. & CORP. OFFICE:

4, BATTERY LANE, RAJPUR ROAD, CIVIL LINES, NEW DELHI-110054 …Opposite Party (Through: Mr. Dharmneder Sehrawat, Mr. Vikas Tomar, Mr. Vikrant Rana, Mr. Ajay Singh, Mr. Sachin Lohia &

Mr. Virender Singh, Advocates)

CORAM:

HON’BLE JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL (PRESIDENT)

HON’BLE MS. PINKI, MEMBER (JUDICIAL)

Present: Mr. Abhishek Sharma, counsel for Complainant Mr. Vikas Tomar & Mr. Nimish Mishra, counsel for OP (M.

No. 9811607053 E-mail: nimishmishra99@gmail.com)

PER : HON’BLE MS. PINKI, MEMBER (JUDICIAL)

JUDGMENT

1. The brief facts necessary for deciding the present complaint are that the Complainant booked Flat No. C-701 in the project of the Opposite Party named “Ashoka Cosmos Greens” situated at Village Saidpur, Alwar Bypass Road, Bhiwadi, District Alwar, Rajasthan. The authorized agents and employees of the Opposite Party assured the Complainant that possession of the flat would be handed over within 42 months from the date of booking and that the services would be of good quality. Relying on these assurances, the Complainant paid a total amount of Rs.15,89,032/- to the Opposite Party through cheques bearing Nos. 842520, 356196, 356200, 997373, and 997378.

2. It is the case of the Complainant that time and again, he requested the Opposite Party to provide the Booking Form/Buyer Agreement so that he could avail the loan from the Bank to make the remaining payment. But, the Opposite Party failed to provide the Booking Form/Buyer Agreement to him and was only repeatedly sending demand letters. Due to this reason, the complainant’s loan application could not be processed by the Bank.

3. It is further the case of Complainant that the Opposite Party failed to fulfill the promises made by it. From 2014 to 2018, the complainant remained in contact with the Opposite Party and also sent various e-mails to the Opposite Party requesting cancellation of unit and refund of the entire amount paid by him. Lastly, the Complainant issued a legal notice dated 27.02.2018 to the Opposite Party seeking refund of the entire amount paid by him along with interest. However, the Opposite Party did not pay any heed to reply the same.

4. Thus, the Complainant had no option but to file the present complaint alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the Opposite Party. The Complainant has prayed that the Opposite Party be directed to refund the entire amount of Rs.15,89,032/- along with interest from January 2014 till realization. The Complainant has also prayed that the Opposite Party be also directed to pay a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- as compensation for mental agony and harassment suffered by him and Rs.2,00,000/- towards litigation expenses.

5. After filing of the present case, notice of the complaint was issued to the Opposite Party on 11.05.2018.

6. Upon service of notice, the Opposite Party has filed its written statement and raised preliminary objections regarding the maintainability of the complaint case. It was contented that the Complainant is not a ‘Consumer’ and was merely investor, who had booked the unit for resale at a higher price and after failing to do so, stopped making payment. It was further contended that there are various questions of facts and law, which require detailed evidence and could not be adjudicated by this Commission. It was stated that the Complainant has not approached the Commission with clean hands and is trying to mislead this Commission.

7. It is further stated that two copies of Buyer Agreement were sent to the Complainant through courier on