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

1.      The complainants the successors in interest of OP No. 3 Kamlesh Kumar Maurya, who booked a residential plot with the OP No.1 & 2 namely Ansal Properties & Infrastructure Ltd. in a project namely ‘Sushant Golf City’, on 21.03.2012 for an agreed consideration of Rs.43,48,260/-.  The OP allotted a plot of land bearing no. 0326 in Sector ‘O’, Pocket-04, admeasuring 242 sq. meters to OP No. 3 in the aforesaid project. The allotment was made pursuant to his application dated 15.02.2012.  Later on, the aforesaid booking was purchased by the complainants from OP No.3 and was duly transferred in their name on 23.08.2012.  The grievance of the complainants is that the possession of the aforesaid plot has not been offered to them by OP No.1 & 2.  The complainants are therefore, before this Commission seeking the following reliefs:

          (a) That the Hon’ble Commission may graciously be pleased to direct the opposite party No.1 & 2 to receive balance amount as per Schedule 1A i.e. Annexure No.1 from the complaint, to provide the developed plot allotted to the complainant by a date fixed alongwith compensation on account of deficiency in services, unfair trade practice and towards loss as mental agony due to delay caused by opposite party No.1 & 2 willfully & with their malafide intention to the extent of Rs.1,50,000/- (One Crore & Fifty Lacs Only) alongwith interest @ 24% per annum till actually delivery of plot of & payment of compensation to the complainants with costs or to pass suitable orders/directions in the circumstances of the case which the Hon’ble Commission may deems, just & proper, be passed against the opposite party No.1 & 2 and in favour of complainants. 

2.      The complaint has been resisted by the OP No.1 & 2 on several grounds including that this Commission does not possess the requisite pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain the complaint. 

3.      As per Section 21 of the Consumer Protection Act, this Commission would have pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain a consumer complaint where the value of the goods or services, as the case may be, alongwith the compensation if any claimed in the complaint, exceeds Rs.1 Crore.  Though the complainants seem to suggest that the current value of the similar plot would be Rs.1,50,00,000/-, there is no evidence to prove the alleged valuation. 

The agreement between the builder and OP No.3 does not disclose within how much time period the possession of the plot was to be delivered to the buyer.  No such period was stipulated even at the time the allotment was transferred in the name of the complainants.  If a reasonable period of three years from the date of the initial allotment is taken as a reasonable period for delivering possession of the plot, the complainants would at best, be entitled to compensation for the period from 21.03.2015 till 02.11.2015 when this complaint came to be filed.  Even if a shorter period of two years from the date of the Buyers Agreement is taken as a reasonable period, the complainants shall be entitled to compensation only from 21.03.2014 to 02.11.2015.  In the cases where the allottee is seeking possession of the house/plot booked by him, this Commission has not awarded compensation at a rate higher than 12% per annum from the committed date of possession.  A claim for compensation @ 24% per annum is highly exaggerated and fanciful and therefore, cannot be entertained.  In fact even if compensation @ 24% per annum is computed from the committed date of possession, the aggregate of the agreed sale consideration and the compensation does not come to more than Rs.1 Crore.  Therefore, from whatever angle I may look at it, there is no escape from the conclusion that this Commission lacks the pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain the complaint. 

4.      The complaint is therefore, dismissed with liberty to the complainants to approach the concerned State Commission by way of a fresh complaint, after making suitable amendments therein.