1.      Heard Mr. M.L. Lahoty, Senior Advocate, for the complainants and Mr. Pragyan Pradip Sharma, Advocate for the opposite parties.

2.      Pidith Consumer Elite Floor Association (a registered society, allegedly formed by 28 floor buyers, in project “Park Alite Floor, Faridabad, Haryana”) filed aforementioned four complaints, under Section-12 (1) (b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. For appreciating the controversy relief of one complaint is mentioned. Following reliefs are claimed in CC/1453/2015:-

(a) direct the opposite parties to complete the construction of the project and handover the floors to the consumers/members of the complainant within 12 months of filing of the present complaint;

(b) direct the opposite parties to pay the EMI of the bank loans taken by the consumers/members of the complainant till the time of actual handing over of the possession of the floors to them;

(c) direct the opposite parties to pay the rent in the case of consumers/members of the complainant who are residing in a rented accommodation till the time of actual handing over of the possession of the floors to them;

(d) direct the opposite parties to waive of the interest part charged by them from the consumers/members of the complainant till date, on account of late payment;

(e) declare the condition of not to sell the floors till actual possession as unreasonable and consequently declare it as void ab-initio;

and in the alternative (f) refund the entire amount paid till date of all the consumers/members of the complainant with interest @24% p.a.; (g) award a sum of Rs.1000000/- as damages to each consumer/ member of the complainant for physical and mental agony suffered by them;

(h) award the cost of litigation of Rs.200000/- to the complainant;

(i) any other orders/directions which this Commission deems, fit in the interest of justice.  

3.      During pendency of the complaint Narayan Kumar Jha filed IA/10679/2016 and Mahender Singh filed IA/10686/2016 for deleting their names from the array of the parties and in these applications it has been stated these applicants withdraw all his claims as set up in the complaint against the opposite parties. IA/19558/2017 and IA/8346/2018 in CC/805/2016 for condonation of delay and placing documents on record. When these applications were listed on 22.04.2019 a prayer was made for the deleting the names of 15 allottees on the ground that these allottees have compromised their disputes. This Commission by order dated 22.04.2019 directed for deleting the names of those 15 allottees who have compromised the disputes.

4.      During pendency of these complaints, Pidith Consumer Elite Floor Association (the complainant) entered into settlement with the opposite parties. The terms of Settlement as mentioned in Annexure-C of Settlement Deed, was duly approved by 2/3^rd majority of the members of the Association, in meeting dated 24.03.2019. Then the complainant executed a Settlement Deed dated 24.03.2019 with the opposite parties. Under clause-2 (e) of the Settlement Deed dated 24.03.2019, the complainant has to withdraw all the above complainants, as the dispute has been settled.

5.      However, instead of withdrawing the complaints, IA/2764/2020, IA/2765/2020, IA/2766/2020, IA/2767/2020 and IA/2768/2020, were filed for the deleting of the names of those floor buyers, who has accepted the settlement and compromised with the opposite party, without disclosing the settlement. The opposite parties have filed IA/8232/2021, IA/8233/2021, IA/8234/2021 & IA/8235/2021 in all the complaints for recalling of order dated 22.04.2019 by which this Commission found that out of 28 allottees on whose behalf the complaints were filed, 15 allottees have compromised with the opposite parties whereas the remaining 13 want to continue with the complaint. The complainant was permitted to file list of those allottees, who had compromised with the opposite parties supported with an affidavit within a week by the order dated 28.10.2021. The complainant has filed the list giving the names of the flat buyers who have compromised the dispute with the opposite parties without affidavit. According to this list out of 34 home buyers 22 have compromised their disputes and 12 home buyers have not compromised their disputes.

6.      The opposite parties in IA/8232/2021, prayed for recalling the order dated 22.04.2019 and directing the association to comply with the terms of settlement deed 24.03.2019 and withdraw the present complaints. No objection has been filed to this application by the complainant.

7.      We have considered the arguments of the counsel for the parties and examined the record. The present complaint has been filed by a registered society/association on behalf of its members as provided under Section 12 (1) b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. After due deliberation between the members of the Association and the opposite parties, the complainant settled the dispute and settlement deed was executed on 24.03.2019 and signed by the President Mr. Navneet Gund for Pidith Consumer Elite Floor Association and the office bearers of the opposite parties. According to this settlement, the members have settled their dispute and President was permitted to withdraw the complaints. Paragraph-2 of the settlement is quoted below:

“2. That in order to settle all the disputes and grievances of the parties, including those raised in the complaints, the parties hereby agree to the following:

(a) Each Member of the Association has agreed to the settlement terms attached as Annexure -C. Except to check the Statement of Accounts which shall be final along with the individual deed of the customers/Members, after reconciliation.

(b) The company and each member of the Association shall comply with the terms of the Settlement as agreed under the present Settlement Deed and their individual Settlement Deeds.

(c) The members of the association shall be given the following benefits as mentioned, in brief in Annexure D.

(d)  The Association agrees to ensure that no prejudice shall be caused to the Company and/or its directors, employees, representatives with respect to the complaints.

(e)  That upon execution of this Settlement Deed, the Association shall withdraw the complaints by filing appropriate applications and the authorized representative will be present before the NCDRC for withdrawal of the complaint.”  

8.      In view of the aforesaid settlement deed, the members of the Association agreed to take possession in terms of the settlement and it was also resolved to withdraw aforesaid  four  complaints as details of which have been given in Paragraph 4B.  However, instead of withdrawing the complaint, the order dated 22.04.2019 has been secured concealing the terms and settlement, therefore, the application has been filed for recalling the order dated 22.04.2019 and dismissing the complaint as withdrawn in terms of settlement deed dated 24.03.2019. A copy of the settlement deed has been attached along with this application. The complainant has not filed any reply/objection to the aforementioned application. In the meantime, the case was listed on 28.10.2021 and the counsel for the complainant undertook to submit a list of the allottees who have settled their dispute with the opposite parties and the names of the allottees who are interested in adjudication of this case. In compliance of the aforesaid order, the complainant has submitted the list on 15.11.2021.

9.      There is no dispute that the complaint was filed by a registered Association who have entered into the settlement deed dated 24.03.2019 with the opposite party. Under this settlement, CC/1453/2015, CC/1454/2015, CC/1455/2015 & CC/805/2016 have to be withdrawn by the office bearers of the Association. These complaints were filed under Section 12 (1) (b) of the Act.  If the complainant i.e. the registered Association  has settled the dispute with the opposite parties then, the complaints cannot be prosecuted further. In such circumstances, the order dated 22.04.2019 is recalled.

The complaints are dismissed as compromised with liberty to the Members who are not agreed with the settlement dated 22.04.2019 to seek their remedy in appropriate forum.