w w w . L a w y e r S e r v i c e s . i n



Rohit Kumar Sahu & Another v/s M/s. Pioneer Urban Land & Infrastructure Ltd.


Company & Directors' Information:- L & T URBAN INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED [Amalgamated] CIN = U45203TN2006PLC059133

Company & Directors' Information:- THE PIONEER LIMITED [Amalgamated] CIN = U22121DL1932PLC199787

Company & Directors' Information:- G K S INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED [Active] CIN = L45400DL1985PLC021038

Company & Directors' Information:- A INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED [Active] CIN = L25191RJ1980PLC002077

Company & Directors' Information:- K D P INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74899DL1993PTC054780

Company & Directors' Information:- C INFRASTRUCTURE CORPORATION LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U61100DL1982PLC013968

Company & Directors' Information:- B & G INFRASTRUCTURE COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U40105TN2001PTC047408

Company & Directors' Information:- O B INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45200TG2006PLC049067

Company & Directors' Information:- Y T INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45202MH2010PTC206409

Company & Directors' Information:- N K B INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45200HR2011PTC042402

Company & Directors' Information:- R K D INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45209WB2009PTC131919

Company & Directors' Information:- B AND B INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U85110KA1987PLC008488

Company & Directors' Information:- PIONEER URBAN LAND & INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U65910DL1985PLC019985

Company & Directors' Information:- PIONEER INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U65923GJ1994PLC021579

Company & Directors' Information:- U C C INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45201MH2003PTC139844

Company & Directors' Information:- L K INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45400MH2010PTC203711

Company & Directors' Information:- B N A INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45201MH2006PTC163769

Company & Directors' Information:- S K J INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45102MH2001PTC131284

Company & Directors' Information:- V P M INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U45400TN2011PTC082368

Company & Directors' Information:- K INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45201GJ2009PTC056299

Company & Directors' Information:- K L N INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U70100KA2013PTC070361

Company & Directors' Information:- C P INFRASTRUCTURE PVT LTD [Active] CIN = U45201DL2005PTC143865

Company & Directors' Information:- G. R. INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45200MH2005PTC152633

Company & Directors' Information:- R P INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45200MH2003PTC141340

Company & Directors' Information:- K. J. INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45201MH2006PTC165014

Company & Directors' Information:- B S Y INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED. [Active] CIN = U70101HR2006PTC064456

Company & Directors' Information:- M AND S INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U45400TN2011PTC083038

Company & Directors' Information:- G B K INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45202MH2008PTC177202

Company & Directors' Information:- G K INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U45200GJ2005PTC046213

Company & Directors' Information:- G S M INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45201DL2004PTC125377

Company & Directors' Information:- V K M INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45400UP2008PTC034606

Company & Directors' Information:- A V INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45203WB2006PTC111599

Company & Directors' Information:- ROHIT INFRASTRUCTURE (INDIA) LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45200MH2005PLC157700

Company & Directors' Information:- B. N. S. INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U45400MH2010PTC206202

Company & Directors' Information:- B G M INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45400WB2011PTC162415

Company & Directors' Information:- S M V INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45200DL2006PTC155016

Company & Directors' Information:- K S INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED. [Active] CIN = U70101MP2006PTC020722

Company & Directors' Information:- K B S INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U70101DL2005PTC136641

Company & Directors' Information:- D L H INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U52600JH2010PTC014524

Company & Directors' Information:- S N N INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45202KA2011PTC059893

Company & Directors' Information:- G. V. INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45400DL2012PTC234078

Company & Directors' Information:- S A P INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45201DL2005PTC141285

Company & Directors' Information:- K S K INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U45400DL2008PTC175908

Company & Directors' Information:- K. E. INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45400MH2012PTC225658

Company & Directors' Information:- P S LAND AND INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45209HR2008PTC037740

Company & Directors' Information:- G S T INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45200MH2006PTC160073

Company & Directors' Information:- S B M INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U70102CH1992PLC012381

Company & Directors' Information:- V D INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45400WB2008PTC122820

Company & Directors' Information:- I V M INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45209TG2011PTC073968

Company & Directors' Information:- KUMAR INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45200BR2005PTC011486

Company & Directors' Information:- B G R INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45202KA2012PTC065026

Company & Directors' Information:- N. R. INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45202GJ2006PTC049520

Company & Directors' Information:- K. G. R INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED. [Strike Off] CIN = U70102DL2008PTC177822

Company & Directors' Information:- A L INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45200MH2008PTC184347

Company & Directors' Information:- C. I. INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45203MP2005PTC018149

Company & Directors' Information:- S G INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45201RJ1999PTC015467

Company & Directors' Information:- J N INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45201OR2008PTC009789

Company & Directors' Information:- K C INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45200PB2008PTC032011

Company & Directors' Information:- A B INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45200MH2004PTC144994

Company & Directors' Information:- S H A INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U45400UP2012PTC049795

Company & Directors' Information:- L V S INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45200TG2006PTC051289

Company & Directors' Information:- V H B INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U45400DL2008PTC172682

Company & Directors' Information:- S & I INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45400HR2007PTC037191

Company & Directors' Information:- V V S INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U70100KA2015PTC084214

Company & Directors' Information:- G. H. INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45309UP2020PTC126090

Company & Directors' Information:- L R INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45402TN2007PTC064029

Company & Directors' Information:- G N R INFRASTRUCTURE (INDIA) LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U45200TG2009PLC065140

Company & Directors' Information:- A R K INFRASTRUCTURE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74900TG2015PTC100714

Company & Directors' Information:- SAHU INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U45201UP2009PTC038210

Company & Directors' Information:- U V F INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45400WB2010PLC153786

Company & Directors' Information:- B K INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U45201DL2005PTC136992

Company & Directors' Information:- C. A. D. INFRASTRUCTURE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U45201MP1997PTC012280

Company & Directors' Information:- R. S. V. INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U70100WB2008PTC127373

Company & Directors' Information:- S KUMAR INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Converted to LLP] CIN = U45203PB2008PTC032431

Company & Directors' Information:- C D E INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45201MH2012PTC235483

Company & Directors' Information:- D B G INFRASTRUCTURE (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U45209PN2010PTC137319

Company & Directors' Information:- C & C INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74210PN2008PTC133179

Company & Directors' Information:- M N V INFRASTRUCTURE (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U45202AN2010PTC000130

Company & Directors' Information:- R P V S INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U45203TG2011PTC072772

Company & Directors' Information:- AMP URBAN INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45400WB2011PTC164960

Company & Directors' Information:- S P H R INFRASTRUCTURE PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U45209WB2006PTC109280

Company & Directors' Information:- S I S INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Under Process of Striking Off] CIN = U70200DL2014PTC263278

Company & Directors' Information:- A S INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U70109DL1996PTC084029

Company & Directors' Information:- P G INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Converted to LLP] CIN = U70109DL1996PTC084030

Company & Directors' Information:- B S INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U70109DL1996PTC084031

Company & Directors' Information:- M S INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U70109DL1996PTC084032

Company & Directors' Information:- PIONEER CO PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U65921CT1964PTC000994

Company & Directors' Information:- J B C INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U45203PN1998PTC112753

Company & Directors' Information:- PIONEER INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED. [Strike Off] CIN = U24299DL1985PTC022842

Company & Directors' Information:- J K L INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U45203TG1998PTC030087

Company & Directors' Information:- R L E S INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U45309TN2008PTC069251

Company & Directors' Information:- I I C INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U70109DL2006PTC152588

Company & Directors' Information:- H. G. INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U45201GJ2007PTC049740

Company & Directors' Information:- S B H INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U60231MH2011PTC217039

Company & Directors' Information:- ROHIT CORPORATION PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45200PN2013PTC146830

Company & Directors' Information:- URBAN LAND INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U45201MH2006PTC164987

Company & Directors' Information:- Z & B INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U70200MH2007PTC166887

Company & Directors' Information:- S & O INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45400MH2011PTC214034

Company & Directors' Information:- ROHIT LAND PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U70102MH2008PTC177511

Company & Directors' Information:- D P S INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U45200MH2006PTC159955

Company & Directors' Information:- M N A INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Converted to LLP] CIN = U45400TG2009PTC063947

Company & Directors' Information:- T S A INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45400UP2014PTC065137

Company & Directors' Information:- V B G INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U70100TG2010PTC069278

Company & Directors' Information:- M N C INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45209TG2011PTC077524

Company & Directors' Information:- M W INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45201CH2008PTC031045

Company & Directors' Information:- M I T INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U45400DL2008PTC180830

Company & Directors' Information:- K K S INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74999DL2007PTC159678

Company & Directors' Information:- I K INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45201DL2005PTC135711

Company & Directors' Information:- A J S INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45201DL2005PTC140640

Company & Directors' Information:- M R INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U45201DL2005PTC143565

Company & Directors' Information:- K W INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U70102DL2011PTC224462

Company & Directors' Information:- A S M INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U70102DL2015PTC279049

Company & Directors' Information:- J V B INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U70102DL2015PTC283560

Company & Directors' Information:- A K S T INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U70109DL2012PTC236675

Company & Directors' Information:- H V INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45200DL2007PTC158234

Company & Directors' Information:- B P M INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U45200DL2008PTC179121

Company & Directors' Information:- M & H INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U80904DL2007PTC166303

Company & Directors' Information:- B H I INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U70101MP2012PTC029256

Company & Directors' Information:- S AND Y INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45200MP2013PTC031382

Company & Directors' Information:- P V R N INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45400HR2010PTC040311

Company & Directors' Information:- C D INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74900HR2007PTC037175

Company & Directors' Information:- R J S INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U45201GJ2009PTC055941

Company & Directors' Information:- B R B INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U45201GJ2008PTC053682

Company & Directors' Information:- B. R. INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U45201GJ2008PTC054103

Company & Directors' Information:- T H D INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45200KL2012PTC032595

Company & Directors' Information:- J S INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U45203GJ2003PTC042641

Company & Directors' Information:- A L E M INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U29308GJ2020PTC118118

Company & Directors' Information:- A AND H INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U45203MH1998PLC117368

Company & Directors' Information:- D L C INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U45201PB2007PTC031022

Company & Directors' Information:- R S J INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U45300DL2007PTC167583

Company & Directors' Information:- ROHIT PRIVATE LIMITED [Not available for efiling] CIN = U99999MH1951PLC009949

    Consumer Case Nos. 835, 837 of 2016

    Decided On, 16 October 2019

    At, National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC

    By, THE HONOURABLE MR. PREM NARAIN
    By, PRESIDING MEMBER

    For the Complainants: Samprikta Ghosal, Priyadarshini Pattnaik, Rahul Goyal, Advocates. For the Opposite Parties: Nikhil Nayyar, T.V.S. Raghavendra Sreyas, Gayatri Gulati, Sneh Dhillon, Advocates.



Judgment Text

The complaint No.835 of 2016 has been filed by Rohit Kumar Sahu & Anr. against opposite party M/s. Pioneer Urban Land & Infrastructure Ltd. and complaint No.837 has been filed by Jasleen Chopra against the same opposite party.

CC No.835 of 2016

2. It is the case of the complainants that the complainants invested in the project of OP “PIONEER PARK” to purchase a constructed flat. Consequently, OP allotted flat No.TK-1203 (A) to complainants vide allotment letter dated 20.8.2009. The total cost of flat is Rs.50,22,000/- as per builder-buyer agreement, however, total payment made is Rs 60,94,667.52. As per the buyer’s agreement, OP shall deliver the possession within 36 months from date of signing and execution of buyer agreement with further extension period of 90 days. Therefore, due date of delivery was 1.5.2013. Buyer agreement was executed on 1.2.2010. On 28.1.2016, OP gave intimation for possession with demand notice of final stage. The granting of possession to the complainant was subject to further payment by him to the OP, though there was no provision for the same in the Buyer’s Agreement and the demand was illegal and untenable. As per the buyer’s agreement, Complainants are not liable to pay the charges on application of occupancy certificate, neither the complainants are liable to pay VAT as the same has been stayed by the Hon’ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana. However, despite the same, the OP has raised the demand on the Complainants. Being aggrieved by the acts and omissions of the opposite party, the complainants have preferred a consumer complaint bearing No.835 of 2016 before this Commission with the following prayers:-

a) “Direct the opposite party to complete and hand over vacant, legal, peaceful and actual possession, in a fit and habitable conditions, after obtaining of certificates of safety, etc, of the Flat bearing No.1203 (A) in Tower K to the complainant by executing conveyance deeds at the earliest, alongwith Occupation Certificate, on the basis of executed Buyer’s Agreement and not the altered conditions of the opposite party.

b) Restrain the opposite party from taking any adverse steps against the complainant, such as cancellation of the allotment, charging of penal and holding charges for the possession offered, etc.

c) Direct the opposite party to accept the balance dues through a proper mechanism ordered by this Hon’ble Court rather than demanding directly, for offering valid possession as per the Buyer’s Agreement, and the same may considered for inclusion;

d) Direct the opposite party to pay to the complainant interest @ 18% per annum on the total paid amount by the complainant from the date of expiry of committed date of possession (when possession was supposed to be handed over in terms of Buyer’s Agreement) till the Filing of Complaint.

e) Pass necessary ad interim orders and directions for the opposite party to pay the complainant delay charges as per buyer’s agreement Interest @18% per annum on the total paid amount by the Complainant from the date of expiry of committed date of possession (when possession was supposed to be handed over in terms of the Buyer’s Agreement) till the Filing of Complaint.

f) Direct the opposite party to pay to complainant the sum of Rs.50,00,000/- (Fifty Lakhs), on account of the physical and mental trauma, mental agony, inconvenience, and hardship suffered by the complainant due to the delay in the handing over of the possession, due to the deficiency in service rendered by the opposite party and due to the unfair trade practices;

g) Award pendentlite and future interest at the rate of 24% on the above compensation from the date of filing of the complaint till the handing over of the possession or the date of refund of payment, as claimed in the present complaint, to the complainant

h) Direct the opposite party to pay the cost of this complaint including the legal fees of Rs.50,000/- and expensed incurred for the travelling etc.; and

i) Direct the opposite party to bear all the additional and increased charges on account of VAT/Service Tax/Service Charges/Stamp Duty/Other statutory payments, from the committed date of possession (when possession was supposed to be handed over in terms of the Buyer’s Agreement);

j) Direct the opposite party not to increase the charge in the super area unless it is clearly demonstrated that the flat unit sizes have increased from what was originally sold to the complainants.

k) Set aside the demands as made by the opposite party in the letter of intimation for possession sent by the opposite party to the complainant, as mentioned above in the complaint;

i) Pass such other or further order/directions as this Hon’ble Commission may deem appropriate in the facts and circumstances of this case and in the interests of justice.”

CC No.837 of 2016

3. It is the case of the complainant that the complainant invested in the project of OP “PIONEER PARK” to purchase a constructed flat. Consequently, OP allotted flat No.TC-2203 to complainant vide allotment letter dated 07.7.2009. The total cost of flat being Rs.59,80,846.48/- and the total payment made is Rs.64,92,500/-. As per the buyer’s agreement, OP shall deliver the possession within 36 months from date of signing and execution of buyer agreement, with extension of 90 days. Therefore, due date of delivery was 24.11.2013. Buyer agreement was executed on 25.8.2009. On 18.1.2016, OP gave intimation for possession with demand notice of final stage. The granting of possession to the complainant was subject to further payment by him to the OP, though there was no provision for the same in the Buyer’s Agreement and the demand was illegal and untenable. As per the buyer’s agreement, Complainant is not liable to pay the charges on application of occupancy certificate, neither the complainant is liable to pay VAT as the same has been stayed by the Hon’ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana. However, despite the same, the OP has raised the demand on the complainant. Being aggrieved by the acts and omissions of the opposite party the complainants have preferred a consumer complaint bearing No.837 of 2016 before this Commission with the following prayers:-

a) “Direct the opposite party to complete and hand over vacant, legal, peaceful and actual possession, in a fit and habitable conditions, after obtaining of certificates of safety, completeness etc, from the competent authority for the Flat bearing No. TC-2203 vide Allotment No.PP/428 to the complainant by executing conveyance deeds at the earliest, along with Occupation Certificate, on the basis of executed Builders Buyer’s Agreement and not the altered conditions of the Opposite party.

b) Restrain the opposite party from taking any adverse steps against the complainant, such as cancellation of the allotment, charging of penal and holding charges for the possession offered, etc.

c) Direct the opposite party to accept the balance dues through a proper mechanism ordered by this Hon’ble Court rather than demanding directly, for offering valid possession as per the Buyer’s Agreement, and the same may be considered for inclusion;

d) Direct the opposite party to pay to the complainant interest @ 21% per annum on the total paid amount by the complainant from the date of expiry of committed date of possession (when possession was supposed to be handed over in terms of Buyer’s Agreement) till the Filing of Complaint.

e) Direct the opposite party to pay to complainant the sum of Rs.50,00,000/- (Fifty Lakhs), on account of the physical and mental trauma, mental agony, inconvenience, and hardship suffered by the complainant due to the delay in the handing over of the possession, due to the deficiency in service rendered by the opposite party and due to the unfair trade practices;

f) Pass necessary ad interim relief orders and directions for the opposite party to pay the complainant delay charges as per buyer’s agreement Interest @ 21% per annum on the total paid amount by the Complainant from the date of expiry of committed date of possession (when possession was supposed to be handed over in terms of the Buyer’s Agreement) till the Filing of Complaint.

g) Award pendentlite and future interest at the rate of 24% on the above compensation from the date of filing of the complaint till the handing over of the possession or the date of refund of payment, as claimed in the present complaint, to the complainant

h) Direct the opposite party to pay the cost of this complaint including the legal fees of Rs.50,000/- and expensed incurred for the travelling etc.;

i) Direct the opposite party to bear all the additional and increased charges on account of VAT/Service Tax/Service Charges/Stamp Duty/Circle Rate/Other statutory payments, from the committed date of possession (when possession was supposed to be handed over in terms of the Buyer’s Agreement);

j) Direct the Opposite Party to refund excess EDC/IDC charges which they have collected from the complainant.

k) Direct the opposite party not to increase the charge in the super area unless it is clearly demonstrated that the flat unit sizes have increased from what was originally sold to the complainants.

l) Pass such other or further order/directions as this Hon’ble Commission may deem appropriate in the facts and circumstances of this case and in the interests of justice.”

4. As both the complaints have been filed against the same opposite party and both the complainants have booked in the same project, they are being decided together. The opposite party resisted both these complaints on the same grounds. The opposite party has raised preliminary objection that this Commission does not have the pecuniary jurisdiction to decide the present complaints. Apart from the preliminary objection, it has been stated that the opposite party got all the necessary permissions before construction. There were certain factors which delayed the construction and they were not within the control of the opposite party. Hence they may be treated as force majeure conditions for which the opposite party cannot be held responsible. The opposite party completed the construction and applied for the occupancy certificate on 24.05.2015. There were certain objections from the fire department and the rectification delayed the completion of the project by one year. However, finally occupation certificate was received on 21.06.2016 and 2.9.2016 for different towers. In anticipation of the occupancy certificate, the possession was offered to the allottees. The complainants did not take the possession even when the opposite party obtained the completion certificate. If the complainants do not take possession purposely, then the opposite party cannot be held liable for any kind of penalty for delayed possession. Based on these grounds, the opposite party has prayed for the dismissal of the complaints.

5. Both the parties filed respective evidence by way of affidavits which were taken on record.

6. As the issues involved and relief claimed in these complaints are similar and the complaints are against the same opposite party for the residential unit allotted in the same project, both of them are decided together. CC No.835 of 2016 will be taken as lead case for examination.

7. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. Learned counsel for the complainants stated that opposite party has taken an objection in respect of pecuniary jurisdiction. Learned counsel for the complainants stated that consideration of the flat is Rs.50,22,000/- whereas the complainants have already paid Rs.60,94,667.52. The market value of the flat in question is more than Rupees One Crore as area of the flat is 1860 sq.ft. and the current rate is Rs.8000/- per sq.ft. Thus, clearly this Commission has the pecuniary jurisdiction to decide the present complaint. Learned counsel further argued that the due date of possession was in May, 2013. The possession was offered on 28.1.2016 without obtaining the occupancy certificate which was obtained only on 21.6.2016. Thus, clearly the possession offered was not the legal possession.

8. Learned counsel further stated that there is no substance in the assertion of the opposite party that the delay has been caused due to the force majeure conditions, which were not within the control of the opposite party because as per the Clause No.35 of the builder-buyer agreement, if there was any force majeure condition, the notice should have been given to the complainant by the opposite party. However, no such notice was given to the complainants. The Clause reads as under:-

“In such an eventuality, the First Party shall be excused from performing during the subsistence of the force majeure prevention provided that the occurrence of such an event and the resultant prevention is communicated to the Second Party as soon as practicable but not later than 45 days thereafter with sufficient details and material to facilitate verification.”

9. It was further argued by the learned counsel for the complainants that when the possession was offered vide letter dated 28.01.2016 of the opposite party, then clearly the occupancy certificate was not with the opposite party. Even when the complaint was filed, the occupancy certificate was not received by the opposite party. However, even after receiving the occupancy certificate, the opposite party has not issued any offer of possession to the complainants, which should have been a legal offer of possession. Therefore, the complainants could not take the possession as there was no legal and valid offer. Learned counsel further informed that the occupancy certificate for the other facilities was granted on 15.5.2017. Therefore, possession could not have been delivered before 15.5.2017. Even as per the agreement, the opposite party is supposed to pay Rs.5/- per sq.ft. per month as penalty for delayed possession for initial one year and then @10/- per sq. ft. per month for the remaining period.

10. Learned counsel for the complainants further stated that it has been contended by the opposite party that the period of 36 months and grace period of three months was only tentative, but these are the periods mentioned in the agreement and the provision of penalty for delayed possession is mentioned beyond this period in Clause 9.5 of the agreement. The provision of grace period of 3 months also indicates that the period relating to handing over of the possession ranges from 36 to 39 months and the penal charges are applicable beyond 39 months. Thus, these periods cannot be considered as tentative. It was further contended by the learned counsel for the complainants that the opposite party has over charged vat and has not refunded the additional amount that was paid by the complainants.

11. On the other hand, learned counsel for the opposite party stated that the present complaint is not maintainable before this Commission as the total consideration as per the builder-buyer agreement is only Rs.50,22,000/-. Earlier, a larger Bench of this Commission had decided in the matter Shahbad Cooperative Sugar Mills Vs. National Insurance Co. Ltd., II (2003) CPJ 81 (NC) that interest will not be added to the value of goods or services for deciding the pecuniary jurisdiction of the consumer forum. However, even if interest @12% is added on this amount from the due date of possession till filing of the complaint, the figure does not reach Rupees One Crore and hence this Commission does not have the pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain the present complaint.

12. In respect of vat, learned counsel stated that 4% was charged, however, 2% has already been refunded to the other customers and the same will be refunded to the complainants, subject to final decision of Haryana State Government. Learned counsel further clarified that as per Clause 1.3 of builder- buyer agreement, it has been agreed upon by the parties that there may be some changes in the super area when the plan is actually executed and therefore, the change in the super area to the tune of 85.59 sq.ft. is covered under the builder buyer agreement and the same cannot be agitated. As per the Clause 1.8 of the builder-buyer agreement, the change in super area can be upto 4% it is actually less than 4%. It was further argued by the learned counsel for the opposite party that the time of 36 months with a grace period of three months as given in clause 9.2 of the builder-buyer agreement was only a tentative period by which it was expected to handover the possession. In this regard, it was further pointed out by the learned counsel that as per Clause 10.2 of builder-buyer agreement if there are any reasons for delay which are beyond the control of the opposite party, such as force majeure conditions or delay in obtaining the occupancy certificate or any other approvals, then the opposite party is entitled to get the extension of time. In the present case, there have been many force majeure conditions such as shortage of labour due to common wealth games, dispute with contractor, shortage of water in the area and delay in receiving the occupancy certificate, which were not within the control of the opposite party. Hence, as per Clause 10.1, there should be no liability on the opposite party to pay any compensation to the complainants for the delay in possession.

13. Learned counsel for the opposite party further stated that the complainants have already paid total demanded amount by the opposite party and the last payment was made on 08.03.2016. The possession is not being taken by the complainants on two grounds that the flat is not habitable and the second point is that there is problem with the water supply. It is wrong to say that water supply is not available in the project. The fact is that the regular water connection was obtained in December, 2015. So far as the allegation of the complainants that flat is not in a habitable condition is concerned, the opposite party has already received the occupancy certificate, which can only be issued by the competent authority when the construction is complete as per the plan and all facilities are in place. Accordingly, it cannot be said that there are any shortcomings in the completion of construction or the flat is not in a habitable condition.

14. It was argued by the learned counsel for the opposite party that by letter dated 05.12.2012 it was informed by the Department of Town & Country Planning , Haryana that there was complete ban on use of common ground water, therefore, work could not proceed with the usual pace, rather, some time was taken in making arrangement to transport the water from outside. This has also resulted in delay for completion of the project. Apart from this, on 14.4.2015, the fire department revised its norms and asked for certain more facility under the project for firefighting.

15. It was further stated by the learned counsel that the State Government introduced orders for installing of the solar panels on the project units. This was a new intervention for the opposite party and therefore, it also delayed the project.

16. Learned counsel for the opposite party further argued that when there was a clear provision of compensation for delayed possession under the builder-buyer agreement and the agreement being binding on both the parties, the complainants cannot demand more compensation than what has been provided in the agreement. Clearly, there is no justification for asking for 18% p.a. interest on the deposited amount for the delay period because the complainants are already getting the benefit of price escalation in the property.

17. I have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for both the parties and have examined the record. The first objection of the opposite party is that this Commission does not possess the pecuniary jurisdiction to decide the present complaint. From the Complaint No.835 of 2016, it is clear that the price of the flat is Rs.50,22,000/-, however, the complainants have deposited Rs.60,94,667.52 and the complainants have demanded 18% p.a. interest on the deposited amount from the due date of possession till actual possession. However, if this interest rate is applied on the amount deposited by the complainants from the due date of possession i.e. 01.05.2013, along with compensation of Rs.50,00,000/- demanded by the complainants for mental agony and harassment, though this demand for mental agony and harassment is unrealistic, the figure exceeds Rs.1.00 crore. Otherwise also, if the interest of 18% p.a.is added to the amount paid till filing of complaint and a reasonable compensation is also provided, the figure may or may not cross the figure of Rs.1 crore, however, now if this complaint is dismissed on the ground of pecuniary jurisdiction, the complainants will have to go to the State Commission where the complaint will also not be accepted because by that time, the amount paid plus interest plus reasonable compensation will definitely be more than Rs.1, crore and then, the State Commission shall not accept and complainants again will have to come to the National Commission. In this perspective, the complaint is considered to be maintainable before this Commission. Clearly if one goes only by the compensation claimed and the value of services, the figure crosses Rs.1 crore and therefore, this Commission will have the pecuniary jurisdiction to decide the present complaint.

18. Admitted facts are that the possession was due in May, 2013. The construction was delayed and the occupancy certificate for towers was received on 21.06.2016 and for other facilities on 15.05.2017. The possession was offered on 28.1.2016 along with final demand by the opposite party. The complainants paid all the demands by 08.03.2016 and nothing was due from the complainants. It is also true that after receiving occupancy certificate, the opposite party did not issue any offer of possession to the complainants. The complaint in the matter has been filed on 18.05.2016. Thus, though the complainants made all the payments by 08.03.2016, but filed the consumer complaint on 18.05.2016 i.e. just after two months. The opposite party has enumerated various reasons for delay in handing over the possession like ban on use of underground water, labour shortage due to common wealth games, order of the State Government for installation of Solar panels and revised requirement of the fire department etc. Hon’ble Supreme Court in Pioneer Urban Land & Infrastructure Ltd. versus Govindan Raghavan, Geetu Gidwani Verma & Anr., II (2019) CPJ 34(SC) has considered all these aspects of delay and has not found them convincing. The Hon’ble Supreme court has upheld the order of this Commission for awarding interest on the amount of refund for the total period of delay. Hon’ble Supreme Court has observed as under:-

“3.8. The National Commission vide Final Judgment and Order dated 23.10.2018 allowed the Consumer Complaint filed by the Respondent - Flat Purchaser, and held that since the last date stipulated for construction had expired about 3 years before the Occupancy Certificate was obtained, the Respondent - Flat Purchaser could not be compelled to take possession at such a belated stage. The grounds urged by the Appellant - Builder for delay in handing over possession were not justified, so as to deny awarding compensation to the Respondent - Flat Purchaser. The clauses in the Agreement were held to be wholly one - sided, unfair, and not binding on the Respondent - Flat Purchaser. 6 The Appellant - Builder was directed to refund Rs. 4,48,43,026/- i.e. the amount deposited by the Respondent - Flat Purchaser, along with Interest @10.7% S.I. p.a. towards compensation.

9. We see no illegality in the Impugned Order dated 23.10.2018 passed by the National Commission. The Appellant - Builder failed to fulfill his contractual obligation of obtaining the Occupancy Certificate and offering possession of the flat to the Respondent - Purchaser within the time stipulated in the Agreement, or within a reasonable time thereafter. The Respondent - Flat Purchaser could not be compelled to take possession of the flat, even though it was offered almost 2 years after the grace period under the Agreement expired. During this period, the Respondent - Flat Purchaser had to service a loan that he had obtained for purchasing the flat, by paying Interest @10% to the Bank. In the

Please Login To View The Full Judgment!

meanwhile, the Respondent - Flat Purchaser also located an alternate property in Gurugram. In these circumstances, the Respondent - Flat Purchaser was entitled to be granted the relief prayed for i.e. refund of the entire amount deposited by him with Interest. 10. The Civil Appeals are accordingly dismissed, and the Final Judgment and Order dated 23.10.2018 passed by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission is affirmed.” 19. Ultimately in the present case, there is a delay of three years in obtaining occupancy certificate and even after receiving the occupancy certificate, the possession has not been offered to the complainants. Even during the pendency of the complaint case before this Commission an interim application was moved for getting the possession of the flat, however, this application was also opposed by the opposite party and therefore, interim possession could not be ordered by this Commission. Thus, it cannot be said that opposite party was ready to hand over the possession, but the complainants did not take the possession willingly. 20. As the construction is complete and the occupancy certificate has also been received by the opposite party, there seems to be no impediment in the grant of possession to the complainants. I also do not find any force in the argument of the complainants that the flat is not in a habitual condition because the competent authority has issued the occupation certificate for the towers as well as for common facilities. As the delay has been caused by the opposite party, complainants are not responsible for paying any holding charges as per Clause 9.4 of the builder-buyer agreement. 21. On the basis of the above discussion, the complaint No.835 of 2016 & 837 of 2016 are allowed and following order is passed:- ORDER 22. The opposite party is directed to hand over the possession of the flats in question complete in all respects as per the builder-buyer agreement within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt/service of this order. The opposite party is further directed to pay interest @4% p.a. on the deposited amount by the complainants before the due date of possession from the date of due possession till actual date of possession. For the amounts paid after the due date of possession, the interest shall be payable, from the date of completion of one year from the date of deposit till the date of physical possession. This compensation of 4% p.a. interest shall be over and above the amount of penalty payable as per Clause 9.5 of the agreement. 23. The opposite party shall also refund the amount of service tax @ 2% to the complainant if not already refunded. The parties to bear their own costs.
O R