ORDER

For the Complainant             Mr Rahul Kripalani, Advocate with

                                        Mr Aditya Pratap S Chauhan, Advocate

For the Opposite party         Mr Himanshu Chugh, Advocate with

                                        Authority Letter

ORDER

1.     Vide order in Madhav Joshi vs Vatika Limited, CC no. 277 of 2019 dated 08.12.2021 this Commission had ordered as under:

11. In the light of the above discussion, we find, both, Deficiency in Service within the meaning of section 2(1) (g) & (o), and Unfair Trade Practice within the meaning of section 2 (1) (r), to be well and truly evident on the part of the Opposite Party since the Opposite Party did not refund the aforesaid amount in immediately despite letter from the Complainant dated 9.4.2018 for the cancellation. In remedy, it would be just and equitable to direct the Builder Co. to pay compensation to the Complainants. The Opposite Party is directed to refund the amount after deduction of 10% which received from the Complainants along with compensation in the form of simple interest @ 9% p.a. from the 9.4.2018 i.e. the date of request for the cancellation from the complaint. The aforesaid direction shall