Back
CC/180/2020 MR. ROHIT UDASI & ANR. VS. WAVE MEGACITY CENTRE PVT. LTD. DOD.: 31.10.2022
ALLOWED
PAGE 1 OF 12
IN THE DELHI STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES
REDRESSAL COMMISSION
Date of Institution: 16.07.2020
Date of hearing: 06.09.2022
Date of Decision: 31.10.2022
COMPLAINT CASE NO.- 180/2020
IN THE MATTER OF
MR. ROHIT UDASI,
S/O MR. RJ UDASI
MS. SHELLY UDASI
W/O MR. ROHIT UDASI
BOTH RESIDENTS OF :
B-709, RAJAPUSHPA ATRIA,
SURVEY NO. 148, GOLDEN MILE ROAD,
KOKAPET, RANGAREDDY DISTRICT
HYDERABAD - 500075
(Through: Chamber of Legal Solutions)
…Complainants
VERSUS
M/S WAVE MEGACITY CENTRE PVT. LTD.
HAVING REGISTERED OFFICE AT:
MEZZANINE FLOOR, M-4,
SOUTH EXTENSION PART-II,
NEW DELHI-110049
(Through: VSA Legal)
…Opposite Party
CC/180/2020 MR. ROHIT UDASI & ANR. VS. WAVE MEGACITY CENTRE PVT. LTD. DOD.: 31.10.2022
ALLOWED
PAGE 2 OF 12
CORAM:
HON’BLE
JUSTICE
SANGITA
DHINGRA
SEHGAL
(PRESIDENT)
HON’BLE MS PINKI, (JUDICIAL MEMBER)
Present:
None for the parties.
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 on the part of
Opposite Party and has prayed the following reliefs:
a) Pass an order thereby directing the Opposite Party
to refund the amount of Rs. 36,43,500/- to the
Complainants.
b) Award punitive damages to the tune of Rs.
2,50,000/- in favour of the Complainants.
c) Award interest pende-lite and future interest
amounting to Rs. 7,50,000/- in favour of the
Complainants.
d) Award litigation expenses to the tune of Rs. 50,000/-
in favour of the Complainants.
e) Any other order/ relief/ direction may also kindly be
passed in favour of the complainant as this Hon’ble
Commission may deem fit, just and proper
according to the facts and circumstances of the
present case and in the interest of justice.
2.
Brief facts necessary for the adjudication of the present complaint
are that on 09.07.2013, the Complainants booked a residential
apartment with the Opposite Party in the project ‘Elegantia
Serviced Residences’ situated at Noida, Uttar Pradesh. Thereafter,
the Opposite Party allotted apartment bearing no. 1903 at 19th
Floor through Allottee Arrangement dated 09.07.2013. As per
Clause 5.1 of the said Allottee Arrangement, the Opposite Party
CC/180/2020 MR. ROHIT UDASI & ANR. VS. WAVE MEGACITY CENTRE PVT. LTD. DOD.: 31.10.2022
ALLOWED
PAGE 3 OF 12
assured the complainants to complete the said project within forty-
eight months alongwith an extended period of six months from the
date of execution of this arrangement. However, till date neither
the construction has been completed nor the possession of the
apartment has been handed over by the Opposite Party. The
Complainants over the time had paid a sum of Rs. 36,43,500/- to
the Opposite Party as and when demanded by it. The Complainants
sent various communications to the Opposite Party to know about
the status of the said project but no satisfactory response was given
by the builder.
3.
Aggrieved by the default in handing over the possession of the said
apartment within stipulated time, now the complainants prayed for
refund of the amount deposited by them alongwith interest and
compensation.
4.
The Opposite Party has contested the present case and raised
preliminary objections as to the maintainability of the complaint
case. The counsel for the Opposite Party submitted that the
Complainants are not ‘consumer’ under the Consumer Protection
Act, 1986 as the Complainant invested the money in real estate to
earn profit. He further submitted that there is an arbitration clause
in the Allottee Arrangement dated 09.07.2013, which bars the
jurisdiction of this commission.
5.
The counsel for the Opposite Party submitted that the delay, if any,
occurred on account of reasons beyond
