JUSTICE V.K.JAIN, PRESIDING MEMBER (ORAL)

1.      The complainants booked a residential flat with the OP in a project namely Emerald Floors Premier in Emerald Estate which the OP is developing in Sector-55 of Gurgaon.  The parties entered into a Buyers Agreement dated 30.01.2010 wherein the sale consideration of the aforesaid flat was agreed at Rs.57,60,199/- in addition to Rs.2,50,000/- towards cost of the covered car parking, Rs.240/- per sq. ft. as external development charges, Rs.30/- per sq. ft. as infrastructure development charges and PLC of Rs.57,60,19.94/-.  Club Membership charges were agreed at Rs.75,000/-.  Thus, the total sale consideration as per the Buyers Agreement comes to Rs.7106719.47/-.  The possession of the flat was to be delivered within 36 months from the execution of the Buyers Agreement i.e. by 29.01.2013.  Since the possession has not been delivered to them, the complainants are before this Commission, seeking possession of the flat booked by them alongwith compensation quantified at Rs.16,17,000/- on account of delay of Rs.20,00,000/- on account of mental agony and harassment. 

2.      This Commission would have pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain a consumer complaint where the value of the goods or services as the case may be and compensation if any exceeds Rs.1,00,00,000/-.  Since the complainants are seeking possession of the flat booked by them, they are at best entitled to a reasonable compensation for the delay in delivering possession of the flat booked by them.  Neither the Hon’ble Supreme Court nor this Commission has awarded compensation in the form of interest at more than 12% per annum from the committed date of possession, in a consumer complaint where the complainant is seeking possession of the house booked by him.  The aforesaid compensation would include compensation on account of financial loss as well as on account of mental agony and harassment if any, as the cost of finance is less than 12% per annum and the consumer in such a case also gets benefit of appreciation if any for the value of the property.  If compensation in the form of interest @ 12% per annum from the committed date of possession i.e. 29.01.2013 is added to the agreed sale consideration, the aggregate does not come to more than Rs.1,00,00,000/-.  Therefore, this Commission does not possess the requisite pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain this complaint.  The complainants cannot be allowed to bypass the State Commission by claiming highly inflated and exaggerated compensation, without any legal basis for such a claim.  If allowed, such an action will distort the scheme of the Consumer Protection Act which envisages institution of complaints having pecuniary value of more than Rs.20,00,000/- and upto Rs.1,00,00,000/- before the concerned State Commission.  The complaint is therefore, dismissed with liberty to the complainants to file an appropriate complaint before the concerned State Commission, in terms of this order.  The appeal stands disposed of.