JUSTICE V.K.JAIN (ORAL)

          The complainant/respondent applied to the appellant for allotment of a residential apartment in project namely “The Views” which the appellant was to develop at Mohali Hills, Sector 105 of Mohali paying a sum of Rs.7,00,000/- as the booking amount.  An allotment letter dated 14.04.2008 was issued to the complainant allotting unit No. H2-F03-303 for a consideration of Rs.44,32,619/-.  An agreement was executed between the parties on 29.05.2008 incorporating their respective obligations. As per the terms and conditions contained in the agreement the possession was to be delivered within 3 years of the allotment though a grace period of 90 days was also available for this purpose.  The possession, therefore, ought to have been offered to the complainant by 14.07.2011 including the grace period of three months.  The possession having not been offered to her the complainant approached the concerned State Commission by way of a consumer complaint seeking refund of the amount paid by her to the appellant.

2.      The complaint was resisted by the appellant company which admitted the allotment made to the complainant as well as the agreement executed with her.  The payment received from her was also not disputed.  It was inter alia stated in the written version that the possession was expected to be handed over to the complainant  by August, 2017.

3.      Vide impugned order dated 16.01.2017 the State Commission directed as under:-

1. To refund the amount Rs.38,14,424/-, to  the  complainant, alongwith interest @12% p.a. (as prayed for)  from the respective  dates  of  deposits onwards.

2. To pay compensation, in the sum of Rs.2 lacs, for causing mental agony and physical harassment, to the complainant.

3. To pay cost of litigation, to the tune of Rs.50,000/- to the  complainant.

4. The payment of awarded amounts mentioned at sr.nos.(i) to (iii), shall be made, within a period of 02 (two) months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order, failing which, the amount mentioned at sr.no.(i) shall carry penal interest @15% p.a., instead of @12% p.a., from the respective dates of deposits onwards, and interest @12% p.a., on the amounts mentioned at sr.nos.(ii) and (iii), from the date of filing of this complaint, till realization.

             Being aggrieved from the order passed by the State Commission the appellant is before this Commission.

   4.      The Ld. counsel for the appellant submits that he is restricting his submission to the quantum of the interest awarded by the State Commission and is also disputing the lumpsum compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- in addition to the interest awarded by the State Commission.  He also submits that considering the recent decline in the rate of interest and the pandemic situation prevailing in the country, grant of interest @ 12% p.a. was not justified. 

   5.      The Ld. counsel for the complainant states on instructions that in order to avoid further litigation in the matter the complainant is ready and willing to accept compensation in the form of simple interest @ 8% p.a. from the date of each payment till the date of refund.  In my opinion, the restricted prayer made by the Ld. counsel for the complainant is justified in the facts and circumstances of the case.  The impugned order is, therefore, modified by directing that the appellant shall refund the entire principal amount of Rs.38,14,424/- to the complainant along-with compensation in the form of simple interest @ 8% p.a. from the date of each payment till the date of refund.  The complainant will also be entitled to the cost of litigation awarded by the State Commission.  The appeal stands disposed of accordingly.