1. The present Consumer Complaint has been filed under Section 12(1)(a) read with Section 21 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short “the Act”) ‘by Mrs. Kamal Girotra and her husband, Mr. S. C. Girotra (hereinafter to be referred to as the “Complainants”) against Opposite Party, M/s. Ansal Crown Infrabuild Pvt. Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the “Developer) seeking refund of the amount paid towards purchase of Apartment along with interest as the Opposite Party Developer failed to hand over the possession of the Apartment booked by them in the Project launched by the Developer in the name and style of Änsal Crown Heights”” (hereinafter to be referred to as “the Project’) located at Sector 80, Faridabad, Haryana.
2. The facts as narrated in the Complaint are that on 12.08.2012, the Complainants had applied for booking of a Residential Apartment in the Group Housing Project namely, “Ansal Crown Heights”, proposed to be developed by the Opposite Party Developer. Vide Allotment Letter dated  15.09.2012 the Complainants were allotted Flat No. 102, Tower 4 of the Project having approximate Super Area of 1788 sq. ft. at the basic rate of ₹3168/- per sq. ft. for a total Sale Consideration of ₹70,23,264/-. The Flat Buyer’s Agreement (hereinafter to be referred to as “the Agreement”) was executed on 23.09.2016. As per Clause 4 of the Agreement, the Opposite Party had contemplated to complete the construction of the Apartment within 18 months from the date of execution of the Builder Buyer Agreement, meaning whereby, in terms of the Builder-Buyer Agreement, the possession ought to have been handed over to the Complainants on or before 23.03.2018. 
3. According to the Complainants, they have paid a sum of ₹56,19,972/- out of total Sale Consideration of ₹70,23,264/- to the Developer during the period from August 2012 to April, 2016. It is also stated that a sum ₹2,36,000/- was adjusted by way of reduction in the per Sq. Ft. rate from ₹3,300/- to ₹3,168/- and this amount has been mentioned as special discount in the ledger of the Opposite Party. It is averred that the Opposite Party Developer has committed gross deficiency in service and adopted Unfair Trade Practices, since the Complainants had, time and again, requested for execution of the Flat Buyer’s Agreement but the same was executed only on 23.09.2016, i.e., after delay of 4 years. The Complainants have sought to rely on the decision of this Commission in the case of Satish Kumar Malhotra Vs. DLF Ltd- (2019) SCC On Line NCDRC 154 wherein it was held that the time period for putting the buyers in possession should be counted from the acceptance of the first installment at hand, therefore, keeping in parlance with the said decision, the Complainants have inferred that since the first installment was collected by the Opposite Party Developer in August, 2012, the possession should have been handed over to them on or before August, 2015. The Complainants have further relied upon the Photographs as annexed in the Complaint evidencing that as on 02.06.2019, only nearly 50% of the construction work was complete. It is submitted that in the absence of exact date of completion of Project, the Complainants are no longer interested in taking possession of the Apartment. Accordingly, on 23.06.18, 06.08.18