Divyesh Pratap Singh & Ors vs Supertech Ltd. & Anr

The complainant booked a residential flat with the opposite party in a project namely ‘Eco Village 1’, which the opposite party was to develop

the Greater Noida. Flat No.1104 (Unit No.R01 8G 011104) was allotted to the complainant for a consideration of Rs.66,92,968/-. The terms and

conditions of allotment were incorporated in an allotment letter dated 30.1.2013 issued by the opposite party to the complainant. As per the aforesaid

allotment letter, the possession of the flat was to be delivered by June, 2015, though the opposite party was also entitled to a grace period of six

months for unforeseen circumstances. Therefore the possession in any case ought to have been delivered by December, 2015. The grievance of the

complainant is that the possession of the flat has not even been offered to them despite they having already paid Rs.65,53,259/-constituting 97.91% of

the total value of the flat. The complainants are therefore before this Commission seeking refund of the amount paid by them alongwith compensation

etc.

The complaint has been resisted by the opposite party which has admitted the allotment made to the complainant as well as payment received from

them. It is alleged that the delay in possession was caused due to unforeseen circumstances beyond the control of the opposite party. It is also pleaded

that the opposite party is agreeable to pay the agreed compensation of Rs.5/- per sq. ft. of super area per month for the delay in possession beyond

the grace period.

It is alleged that the construction of the flat was delayed on account of the land acquisition litigation between the farers and the State of U.P. and

stay order on construction of the projects in Greater Noida West. A reference in this regard is made to Writ Petition No. 37443 of 2011, Gajraj & Ors.

Vs. State of U.P., decided on 21.10.2011. It is also alleged that there was shortage of labour in the year 2014-15 and the opposite party had applied

for the completion certificate for the tower in which the flat of the complainant is situated in December, 2016, though the same is not received as yet.

It is also alleged that there was slow down in the Real Estate sector in year 2013-15, due to inflation in the market. The opposite party has also alleged

shortage of building material in the market.

No evidence has been led by the opposite party to prove that there was any order passed by any Court stopping construction of project in which the

flat was booked by the complainant, after booking of the said flat by them. Therefore, it cannot be said that the construction of the flat allotted to the

complainant was delayed on account of any Court order.

There is no evidence on record to prove any alleged shortage of labour or building material in the market during the relevant period. Therefore, the

allegation of the alleged shortage seems to be only an excuse made with a view to justify the delay.

The opposite party had applied for the completion certificate of the tower, in which the flat allotted to the complainant is situated in December, 2016

though it was under a contractual obligation to deliver possession of the flat by June, 2015. It was only for unavoidable reasons that it was entitled to a

grace period of six months. Therefore, it is quite evident that the opposite party has failed to deliver upon the promise made by it to the complainants.

The complainants cannot be compelled to wait indefinitely for the possession of the flat allotted to them and are entitled to refund of the entire amount

paid by them, alongwith reasonable compensation.

No specific evidence has been led by the complainant to prove the actual loss suffered by them on account of failure of the opposite party to deliver

possession of the flat allotted to them, except the loan taken by them from the Bank. Considering the interest rates prevailing on bank deposit at the

relevant time, I am of the considered view that they are entitled to compensation in the form of simple interest @ 10% per annum from the date of

each payment till the date of full refund alongwith compensation in the form of interest. This is acceptable to the learned counsel for the complainants.

For the reasons stated hereinabove, the complaint is disposed of with the following directions:

(i) The opposite party shall refund the entire principal amount of Rs. 65,53,259/- to the complainants alongwith compensation in the form of simple

interest @ 10% per annum from the date of each payment till the date of full refund alongwith compensation in the form of simple interest.

(ii) If any loan taken by the complainant from a bank on financial institution is still outstanding, the opposite party shall first discharge the amount of

such outstanding loan and then pay the balance amount to the complainant.

(iii) The opposite party shall pay a sum of Rs.25,000/- as the cost of litigation to the complainant

(iv) The payment in terms of this order shall be made within three months from today.