ORDER

1.      Heard Ms. Geeta Luthra, Sr. Advocate, assisted by Ms. Shivani Luthra Lohiya, Advocate, for the complainants and Mr. Pinaki Misra, Sr. Advocate, assisted by Mr. Pravin Bahadur, Advocate, for the opposite party.

2.      Smt. Swarnpreet Kaur and Shivneet Singh have filed above complaint, for directing the opposite party to (i) complete the project in all respect, as per specifications, within stipulated period and handover possession of the unit allotted to them; (ii) declare the demands of increased area, enhanced EDC/IDC, Bulk Power Supply, Other costs, Escalation charges, Service tax, as shown in their statement of Account as on 27.01.2017, as illegal; (iii) declare “part occupation certificate” issued in the name of Naja Builders and Promoters Pvt. Ltd., as illegal; (iv) declare the action of the opposite party, insisting them to execute an undertaking for not claiming delay compensation, as illegal; (v) declare the practice of including area of club building in ‘super area’ of the buyers and retaining its ownership, as unfair trade practice; (vi) declare car parking charges, as illegal; (vii) declare the demands, which are yet not crystallized and due, as illegal; (viii) declare the action of the opposite party, in forcing the buyers to join the condominium formed by them, as illegal and unfair trade practice; (ix) to pay delay compensation in the form of interest @18% per annum on their deposit as the opposite party was charging interest @18% per annum, on delayed payment of instalments under clause-2.c of the agreement; (x) pay Rs.one crore, as compensation for mental agony, harassment and deficiency in service; (xi) pay pendent-lite and future interest @18% per annum; (xii) grant exemplary cost and the costs of litigation; and (xiii) any other relief which is deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.

3.      The complainants stated that DLF New Gurgaon Homes Developers Private Limited (the opposite party) was a company, registered under the Companies Act, 1956 and engaged in the business of development and construction of group housing project. The opposite party launched a group housing project in the name of “The Primus DLF Garden City” at Sector-82-A, Gurgaon, in the year 2012 and made wide publicity of its facilities and amenities, like as multi-purpose hall with banqueting facilities, card room, snooker room, Aerobic/Yoga centre, gymnasium with modern equipment, steam & sauna, squash court, tennis courts, mini home theatre/A.V. room, shops, swimming pool with change rooms, separate kids pool etc. Believing upon the representations of the opposite party, the complainants booked a flat and deposited booking amount of Rs.751770/- on 31.08.2012. The opposite party allotted Apartment No.PMC024 on 06.09.2012 and executed Apartment Buyer’s Agreement on 24.12.2012, in which, basic price of Rs.12143250/- was mentioned. The complainants opted for “down payment plan”, under which, Rs.1442474/- was given as down payment rebate. The complainants deposited Rs.11593350/- on 15.10.2012 and balance amount of Rs.919500/- was payable on offer of possession. Clause 11(a) of the agreement provides 42 months period from the date of the application for delivery of possession, which period expired on 28.02.2016. Supplying final statement of account, vide letter dated 27.01.2017, the opposite party demanded Rs.1651245.68 and asked to complete documentation for delivery of possession. Statement of account depicts demands of Rs.128250/- for increase of 19 sq.ft. area, Rs.413195/- as other costs, Rs.118594/- as contingency deposit, Rs.12377/- as gas pipe charges, Rs.119443/- as escalation charges, Rs.269850 as “interest bearing maintenance security” and Rs.495880/- as service tax. In documentation, the opposite party sought for an indemnity-cum-undertaking from the complainants to the effect that they had no objection against nomination of maintenance agency by the opposite party and they would have no claim o