ORDER

1.      Heard Mr. Ravi Kishan Chandna, Advocate, for the appellant.

2.      Aforementioned appeal has been filed from the order of State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Delhi, dated 21.09.2021, passed in Consumer Complaint No.892 of 2018, allowing the complaint and directing the appellant (opposite party-1) to refund the entire amount of Rs.2112000/- with interest @6% per annum, from the date of each deposit till 21.09.2021. If the aforesaid amount is not paid till 20.11.2021, then rate of interest would be @9% per annum, from the date of each deposit till the date of payment to the complainants, to pay compensation of Rs.100000/- for mental agony and harassment and cost of Rs.50000/-.

3.      Swati Agarwal, Beena Dimri and Sneh Lata (respondents-1 to 3) filed C.C. No. 892 of 2018 for directing the appellant and respondent-4 (i) to refund entire amount of Rs.2112000/- with interest @18% per annum from the date of deposit till its realization to the complainants, (ii) to pay compensation of Rs.250000/-, (iii) to pay cost of Rs.50000/- and (iv) any other relief which is deemed fit and proper, in the circumstances of the case.

4.      The facts, as stated in the complaint and emerged from the documents attached with it, are that Mist Avenue Private Limited (the appellant) (hereinafter referred to as the developer) was a company, incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 and engaged in development and construction of residential and commercial buildings. The developer launched a commercial project in the name of “Mist Prime” in Sector-143-A, Noida in the year 2011 and represented that the office space of an area of 660 sq.ft. and possession within 36 months, complete in all respect would be given. On coming to know about the project, the complainants jointly booked an office space on 11.04.2014 and deposited Rs.200000/-. The complainants deposited Rs.2112000/- till 02.06.2014. They were allotted Unit No. 1108, Block-P-1 in “Mist Prime”, on 20.06.2014, super area 660 sq.ft., basic sale price of Rs.2112000/-, total sale price of Rs.2442000/-. Payment plan was “Down Payment Plan”. The developer executed Builder Buyer Agreement dated 07.06.2014, in favour of the complainants, in which, total price was mentioned as Rs.2467900/- and Clause-2.1 of the BBA provides that the developer shall endeavour to complete the construction, within period of 36 months with grace period of 12 months from the date of execution of the BBA subject to timely payment. As the complainants had already deposited entire basis sale price as such they had no option, except to sign the BBA. After expiry of 36 months period, the complainants visited the site and found that no construction was going on. The complainants sought for refund of their amount on 05.06.2017, from the opposite parties. Then the developer assured that the construction would be completed within 6 months. After expiry of six months, the complainants again inquired about the construction but no progress was found. They had booked the office space for their personal use but due to delay in possession, the purpose has been frustrated. Clause-20 of Builder Buyer Agreement dated 07.06.2014, provides for exclusive jurisdiction of Courts of Delhi. The complaint was filed before Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission on 17.07.2018.

5.      The appellant filed its written reply on 25.03.2019 and contested the complaint. The appellant stated that Noida had allotted 100980 sq. meter land in Section 143, Noida to one Anand Infoedge Private Limited vide lease deed dated 21.08.2008. Anand Infoedge Private Limited entered into a collaboration agreement dated 28.07.2014, with retrospective effect from 26.10.2012, for construction and development of the project “Mist Prime” with Mist Avenue Private Limited (opposite party-1). Subsequently Anand Infoedge Private Limited executed another collaboration agreement dated 27.07.2017 with Mist Direct Sales Private Limited (opposite party-2), whic