Petitioners failed to meet payment obligations under contract, leading to justified forfeiture of their earnest money due to default before the expiration of terms.

The complainants/petitioners booked a residential plot admeasuring 442.52 square yards with the respondent in Panchkula by submitting an application signed by both of them in English. The total price of the plot as per the application was Rs.1,89,39,930/- in addition to some other charges specified in the application. The complainants/ petitioners opted for the installment payment plan. Payment of Rs. 12 lacs was made by them by way of two cheques dated 07.01.2012. There were several printed terms and conditions annexed to the application which were also signed by both the petitioners/complainants on each page. As per class 13 of the terms and conditions forming part of the application, the complainants were to offer position within 24 months of the application subject to timely payment by the complainants/petitioners.

2. The respondents issued a letter dated 03.02.2012 to the complainants, enclosing therewith the booking receipt along with the payment plan. As per the payment plan, a copy of which has been submitted by the learned counsel for the respondents today in the court the second installment of Rs. 19,07,778/- was to be paid by 12^th March 2012. Subsequent installments were payable at an interval of 2 months each till seventh installment and thereafter three instalments were to be paid at the interval of 3 months each. The final installment was to be paid on offer of possession.

3. The complainants did not make any payment after they had paid the booking amount of rupees 12 lacs along with the application, thereby committing default in payment even of the second installment of Rs.19,07,778/- which was payable on 12.03.2012. Complainant No. 1 sent a letter dated 14.05.2012 to the respondents stating therein that the Hon’ble Supreme Court had vide its order dated 13.05.2012 stayed construction work in Pinjore Urban Estate in Panchkula and, therefore, the amount of Rs. 12 lacs paid by him be refunded so that he could build a house at another place. This letter was followed by an undated letter sent by the complainant No. 1 to the respondent in which he inter alia stated that at that time when he visited the office of the respondent No. 1, Mr. Gagan had represented to him that the price of the plot would be Rs. 40,000/- per square yard and since he was not conversant with English and no translation was provided to him, the application form was submitted by him. Since the amount paid by them to the respondents was not refunded complainants/petitioners approached the concerned District Forum by way of a consumer complaint.

4. The complaint was resisted by respondents primarily on the ground that the complainants/petitioners had defaulted in making balance payment as a result of which the entire amount paid by them had been forfeited, the said amount being less than the earnest money which could be forfeited in case of default in payment of the balance sale constitution.

5. District Forum allowed the consumer complaint and directed refund of the amount of Rs. 12 lacs with interest and compensation.

6. Being aggrieved from the order passed by District Forum respondents approached the concerned Dtate Commission by way of an appeal. Vide impugned order dated 27.03.2019 State Commission allowed the appeal and consequently dismissed the consumer complaint. Being aggrieved complainants/petitioners are before this Commission.

7. First question which arises for consideration in this petition is as to whether the complaint was barred by limitation or not. Admittedly, the complainants had sought refund of the amount which they had paid to the respondents vide letter dated 12.05.2012. The amount deposited by th