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.      Mayank Kumar and Nilima Jaiswal have filed above complaint, for directing the opposite party to (i) handover the possession of the flat allotted to them, complete in all respect with all facilities and amenities; (ii) pay delay compensation in the form of interest @12% per annum on their deposit from due date of possession till the date of handing over possession; (iii) declare that the complainants are not liable to pay Rs.142025/- towards cost of increase in super area of 19 sq. ft., Rs.119788/- towards charges for bulk power supply, creating infrastructure and installation, Rs.413195/- towards other costs, Rs.12377/- towards gas piping charge, Rs.97195/- towards Value Added Tax as contingency deposit, Rs.119443/- towards escalation charges, Rs.918107.21 as service tax; (iv) to refund Rs.1695000/- with interest @18% per annum; (v) declare that the complainants are not liable to take electricity connection through the opposite party; (vi) pay Rs.1000000/- as compensation for mental agony and harassment, (vi) pay exemplary costs and litigation costs; and (vii) any other relief which is deemed fit and proper in the facts 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, such 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 on 22.02.2012. On 12.03.2012, the opposite party allotted Apartment No.PMA-173, super area 1799 sq.ft., total cost of Rs.14247275.02 and executed Apartment Buyer’s Agreement on 03.08.2012. The complainants opted for “construction link payment plan”. As per demand, the complainants deposited Rs.770000/- on 22.02.2012, Rs.640000/- on 07.04.2012, Rs.830330/- on 07.04.2012, Rs.265000/- on 21.05.2012, Rs.500000/- on 21.05.2012, Rs.152000/- on 21.05.2012, Rs.280129/- on 21.05.2012, Rs.299000/- on 21.05.2012, Rs.300000/- on 21.08.2012, Rs.320000/- on 21.08.2012, Rs.550000/- on 21.08.2012, Rs.150000/- on 21.08.2012, Rs.176129/- on 21.08.2012, Rs.28767/- on 29.05.2013, Rs.614000/- on 13.08.2013, Rs.87000/- on 13.08.2013, Rs.393000/- on 24.08.2013, Rs.1000000/- on 06.12.2013, Rs.141901/- on 13.12.2013, Rs.500000/- on 07.02.2014, Rs.136602/- on 27.03.2014, Rs.100000/- on 27.03.2014, Rs.1541783/- on 31.03.2014, Rs.751880/- on 04.07.2014, Rs.751988/- on 04.10.2014, Rs.751369/- on 20.12.2014, Rs.751369/- on 20.04.2015, Rs.631166/- on 14.01.2016, Rs.41000/- on 25.02.2016, Rs.1800/- on 16.07.2016, Rs.23000/- on 17.10.2016 (total Rs.13479213/-).  Clause 11(a) of the agreement provides 42 months period from the date of the application for delivery of possession, which period expired on 22.08.2015. The opposite party applied for issuance of “occupation certificate” for Towers-A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, J, and EWS block, which was issued on 07.10.2016 but in respect of club building and related facilities, “Occupation certificate”, has not been issued as such it was a “part occupation certificate”. Statement of account depicts demands of Rs.43406.76, as interest, Rs.142025/- for increase of 19 sq.ft. area, Rs.119788/- for bulk power supply, Rs.413195/- as other costs, Rs.97195/-