NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
PREM NARAIN, J
CHIRAG AGGARWAL – Appellant
Versus
M/S. ANSAL TOWNSHIPS INFRASTRUCTURE LTD. – Respondent
CONSUMER CASE NO. 402 OF 2017
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. consumer initiated complaint for delayed possession of a flat. (Para 1) |
| 2. consumer awarded possession and compensation due to breach of deliverables. (Para 2 , 6) |
| 3. opposite party failed to comply with the civil court ruling. (Para 3 , 10) |
| 4. opposite party asserts compliance with contractual timelines. (Para 4) |
| 5. court directed rectification of delays in possession delivery. (Para 5 , 11) |
This consumer complaint has been filed by the complainant Chirag Aggarwal against the opposite party M/s. Ansal Townships Infrastructure Ltd.
2. Brief facts as given in the complaint are that vide allotment letter dated 27.09.2010, the opposite party allotted residential flat bearing no.C-1160-FF measuring 1394 Sq. feet on the first floor for basic sale consideration of Rs.59,50,000/-. The Flat Buyer Agreement was signed on 19.10.2010. The complainant paid a total of Rs.65,63,043/- till 28.01.2014. A purported offer of possession was issued to the complainant on 06.11.2013. As the opposite party failed to address the grievances of the complainant, the complainant filed a civil suit bearing no.25123/2013 in November, 2013 at Gurgaon. The civil suit was finally decreed in favour of complainant on 06.09.2016 and the earlier offer letter dated 06.11.2013 was set aside and the opposite party was restrained to demand 15% of the consideration till internal finishing and 5% till completion. It is the grievance of the complainant that in spite of the order of the civil court dated 06.09.2016, the opposite party has not issued any fresh offer of possession and has not handed over the possession. It has been prayed to direct the opposite party to hand over the possession complete in all respects as per the agreement signed between the parties and to pay compensation in the form of interest on the amount paid by the complainant.
3. The complaint has been resisted by the opposite party by filing the written statement wherein it has been stated that as per the clause 5.2 of the agreement, the possession was required to be given within 30 months along with an extended period of six months from the date of execution of the agreement. Thus, the possession was due by May, 2014. The possession was offered to the complainant on 06.11.2013, however, the complainant did not accept the possession and filed a civil suit. The occupation certificate was applied by 22.09.2014 and the same was received on 10.11.2014. The complainant did not come forward to take possession even after the decision of the civil court. It was further mentioned in the written statement that as per clause 5.1 of the agreement, the Company shall endeavour to complete the development of residential colony and the dwelling unit as far as possible within 30 months with an extended period of 6 months.
4. It is pertinent to mention that the building plan of the said project was sanctioned on 06.05.2011 and OP had completed the construction of the tower under which subject unit was situated within the prescribed period as mentioned in the agreement and offered possession to the complainant on 06.11.2013.
5. It was further stated that in terms of agreement, OP was to offer possession till May, 2014, however, since the complainant filed Civil Suit bearing no.25123/2013 at Gurgaon and the Court vide Oder dated 03.05.2014 restrained the OP from raising any further demand from the complainant due to which OP was not able to raise any demand and thereby could not offer possession. The order reads as under:-
“No one has appeared on behalf of the defendant. Case called several time since morning. It is already 2:30 P.M. No further wait is justified. Therefore, defendants no.1 is hereby proceeded against exparte.
Adjourned to 22.05.14 for exparte evidence of the plaintiff. Defendant is restrained from raising the demand of Rs.21,,90,519/- from the plaintiff till further orders.”
6. It was further alleged that the suit was disposed of vide order dated 06.09.2016 and only then the OP got entitled t
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.