At, National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
By, THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.K. JAIN
By, PRESIDING MEMBER
For the Complainant: Sahil Mongia, Advocate. For the Opposite Parties: Varun, Chitra, Advocates.
I.A. NO. 14706 OF 2019 (For early hearing)
This is an application seeking early hearing of the complaint on the ground that the matter is covered by the previous decisions of this Commission and the complainant wants to restrict his claim to the refund of the principal amount paid by him to the OP alongwith compensation in the form of simple interest @ 10% per annum in terms of the agreement between the parties. The hearing of the Consumer Complaint is therefore, preponed and it is taken up for final hearing, since both the parties are represented by their respective counsels. The application stands disposed of.
The complainant alongwith Mrs. Sumeet Chadha, booked a residential apartment with the OP in a project namely ‘Unitech Verve’ which the OP was to develop on Plot No.11, Sector-Pi-II of Greater Noida. Vide allotment letter dated 10.02.2007, Flat No.2202 in Tower No.4 of the said project was allotted to them on the terms and conditions annexed thereto. The sale consideration for the apartment was agreed at Rs.61,21,681/-. As per clause 4(a)(i) of the terms and conditions, the possession was proposed to be delivered within 36 months thereof subject of course to force majeure circumstances. Vide letter dated 04.03.2008, the name of Mrs. Sumeet Chadha was deleted from the allotment whereafter, the complainant became the sole allottee of the said flat.
The flat allotted to the complainant was later changed to Flat No.2102 on 20th Floor of Tower No.4 vide letter dated 24.01.2008.
2. The grievance of the complainant is that though the possession ought to have been delivered by 10.02.2010, the same has not been offered till date despite his having paid Rs.58,51,803/- to the OP. The complaint is therefore, before this Commission seeking refund of the amount paid to the OP alongwith compensation etc.
3. The OP did not file any written version despite service and its right to file the said written version was closed vide order dated 27.03.2019.
4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have considered the affidavit by way of evidence and documents filed by the complainant. The documents and the affidavits filed by the complainant prove the allotment made to him as well as the terms and conditions of the said allotment. The affidavits and the documents also prove the consideration already paid by complainant to the OP. Since the possession has not even been offered and more than nine years from the last date committed for this purpose have already expired, the complainant is justified in claiming refund of the entire amount paid by him to the OP alongwith compensation etc.
5. The learned counsel for the complainant, having taken instructions from the complainant states that the complainant is restricting his claim to the refund of the principal amount paid by him to the OP alongwith compensation in the form of simple interest @ 10% per annum in terms of clause 4.e which reads as under:
If for any reason the Developer is not in a position to offer the Apartment altogether, the Developer shall offer the Allottee(s) an alternative property or refund the amount in full with Simple Interest @ 10% per annum without any further liability to pay damages or any other compensation on this account.
6. The learned counsel for the complainant states that though no written version has been filed in this consumer complaint, several other consumer complaints pertaining to this very project have already been allowed by this Commission.
7. Reliance is placed upon the decision of this Commission in Dewan Ashwani & Ors. Vs. Unitech Reliable Projects Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. CC No.282/2012, decided on 07.05.2015. Reliance is also placed upon Consumer Complaint No. 709 of 2015, Ankur Goel Vs. Unitech Reliable Projects Pvt. Ltd., decided on 27.07.2016, wherein some additional contentions advanced by the opposite party with respect to the pecuniary jurisdiction of this Commission were rejected by this Commission.
Reliance is also placed upon Neha Suri Vs. M/s Unitech Reliable Projects Pvt. Ltd. CC No. 977 of 2015 decided on 04.01.2017 and Kiran Agarwal Vs. Unitech Reliable Projects Pvt. Ltd. CC No.1487/2016, decided on 31.08.2017.
8. For the reasons stated hereinabove, the complaint is dispos
Please Login To View The Full Judgment!
ed of with the following directions: (i) The opposite party shall refund the entire principal amount of Rs.58,51,803/- to the complainant alongwith compensation in the form of simple interest @ 10% per annum with effect from the date of each payment till the date of full refund. (ii) The OP shall also pay a sum of Rs.25,000/- as the cost of litigation to the complainant. (iii) The payment in terms of this order shall be made within three months from today.