A person purchasing units for commercial purposes does not qualify as a 'consumer' under the Consumer Protection Act, thus limiting maintainability of the complaint.

1. Heard Mr. Aditya Parolia, Advocate, for the complainants and Mr. A.R. Takkar, Advocate, for the opposite party, through video conferencing.

2. Akhilesh Kumar Naithani and Smt. Kusum Naithani (the complainants) have filed this complaint for directing M3M India Private Limited (opposite-party), (hereinafter referred to as the builder) (i) to give physical possession of Unit-1 to the complainants, complete in all respects and in conformity with agreement-1 and execute all necessary and required documents in respect of Unit-1, in favour of the complainants; (ii) to waive off delayed penalty charges imposed on the complainants by the opposite party, at interest rate of 24% per annum with respect to Unit No. 1; (iii) to hand over possession of Unit-2 and Unit-3 to the complainants, complete in all respects and in conformity with agreement-2 and agreement-3 respectively and execute all necessary and required documents in respect of said Unit-2 and Unit-3, in favour of the complainants within a period of 6 months, from the date of filing of this complaint; (iv) to pay interest @ 12% per annum, on the amount deposited by the complainants with the opposite party towards consideration of Unit-2 and Unit-3, with effect from the date of delivery of possession, promised in Agreement-2 and Agreement-3 respectively, till the date of actual possession as per clause (c) of above agreements; (v) to pay compensation of Rs. 10,00,000/- to the complainants, for mental agony and harassment, discomfort and undue hardship caused to the complainants as a result of acts and omission on the part of the opposite party (vi) to pay Rs.1,00,000/- to the complainants as the cost of litigation and (vii) any other relief which the Commission deems fit and proper, in the fact and circumstances of the case, be passed.

3. The facts as stated in the complaint are that the builder was a company, engaged in the business of development and construction of multi-story residential and commercial buildings and selling its unit to the prospective buyers. The builder advertised for construction of commercial complex over the revenue estate of villages Maidawas and Badshahpur, Sector-67, District Gurugram, Haryana, in the name of “M3M Urbana” in 2015. Complainant-2 is an interior designer and was working from home. She was in need to set up her own office for her business venture, for the purposes of earning their livelihood by way of self-employment. Therefore, the complainants booked three units in the project “M3M Urbana” on 30.09.2015 and opted for “Possession Linked Payment Plan”, under which 30% of sale consideration has to be paid within 30 days of booking and 70% within 30 days of the notice of possession. Provisional Allotment letters dated 30.09.2015 were issued to them, the details of which are:- (i) Unit-1- Unit No. SB/R/GL/06/21, Block-6, super area 900.65 sq. ft., total consideration of Rs.1,93,00,168/-, Buyer’s Agreement dated 24.11.2015 (Agreement-1). Promised date of possession-12 months with grace period of 6 months, from the date of agreement. Amount paid was Rs.59,85,622/-; (ii) Unit-2- Unit No. SB/R/GL/07/11, Block-7, super area 905 sq. ft., total consideration of Rs.1,95,26,720/-, Buyer’s Agreement dated 20.01.2016 (Agreement-2). Promised date of possession-24 months with grace period of 6 months, from the date of agreement. Amount paid was Rs.71,45,491/-; and Unit-3- Unit No. SB/R/GL/07/10, Block-7, super area 904.65 sq. ft., total consideration of Rs.1,76,97,696/-, Buyer’s Agreement dated 20.01.2016 (Agreement-3). Promised date of possession-24 months with grace period of 6 months, from the date of agreement. Amount paid was Rs