NCDRC

NCDRC

CC/431/2016

SANJAY SACHDEVA - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/S. EMAAR MGF LAND LTD. & ANR. - Opp.Party(s)

M/S LEX ALLIANCE

22 Aug 2023

ORDER

NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
NEW DELHI
 
CONSUMER CASE NO. 431 OF 2016
1. SANJAY SACHDEVA
I-15, FOREST MANOR, 588 JINGENG ROAD,
SHANGHAI
2. KASHIKA SACHDEVA
Wife of Sanjay Sachdeva, Resident of 1-15, Forest Manov, 588, Jinseng Road,
SHANGHAI,
INDIA
...........Complainant(s)
Versus 
1. M/S. EMAAR MGF LAND LTD. & ANR.
ECE HOUSE, 28 KASTURBA GANDHI MARG,
NEW DELHI-110001.
2. M/S. BRIJBASI PROJECTS PVT. LTD.
(THROUGH ITS MD) 1557, SECTOR-45,
GURGAON.
...........Opp.Party(s)

BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAM SURAT RAM MAURYA,PRESIDING MEMBER
 HON'BLE BHARATKUMAR PANDYA,MEMBER

FOR THE COMPLAINANT :
MR. VIVEK SINGH, ADVOCATE
MS. KIRTI MEWAR, ADVOCATE
FOR THE OPP. PARTY :
MR. ADITYA NARAIN, ADVOCATE
MR. MISHRA RAJ SHEKHAR, ADVOCATE

Dated : 22 August 2023
ORDER

1.      Heard counsel for the parties. 

2.      Above complaint has been filed directing the opposite parties to (i) to hand over possession of the unit no.PTS-10-1001 and execute the conveyance deed in favour of the complainant, (ii) to pay delay compensation in the form of interest @12% per annum on the amount deposited by the complainant till the date as compensation from the due date of possession till the actual possession of the apartment, (iii) to grant immunity to the complainants from payment of any charges incurred due to any escalation in cost including enhanced service tax, (iv) to pay Rs.100000/- to each of the complainants towards the cost of litigation and (v) any other relief which is deemed fit and proper in the facts of the case.

3.      The complainant stated that M/s Emaar MGF Land Ltd. and M/s Brijbasi Projects Pvt. Ltd. were companies registered under the Companies Act and engaged in the business of construction and development of group housing project.  M/s Brijbasi Projects Pvt. Ltd. was owner of the project land while M/s Emaar MGF Land Ltd. was the promoter.  In the year 2010, the opposite party launched a group housing project known as ‘Palm Terraces Select’ at Village Badshahpur, Sector-66, Gurgaon and made vide publicity of its facilities and amenities.  Believing upon the representation of the opposite party, the complainant booked a flat in the year 2010 and deposited the booking amount on 27.06.2010.  The agreement was executed in favour of the complainant on 11.12.2010.  The payment plan as attached along with the agreement was construction linked payment plan.  As per demand of the opposite party, the complainant has deposited the instalment on time and made total payment of Rs.18193929/- up to conveyance deed.  Clause 14(a) of the agreement provides for 36 months’ period from commencement of the construction with grace period of three months for handing over possession.  Due date of possession has expired but the opposite party has not handed over possession.  Inspite of various assurances, when the opposite party has delayed the possession for unlimited period, then the complaint was filed on 04.03.2016. 

4.      During the pendency of the complaint, the opposite party, vide letter dated 29.08.2019, offered possession to the complainant and the complainant took possession on 24.08. 2020 and conveyance deed has also been executed in favour of the complainant on 08.03.2021.  Therefore, the present complaint is confined to the delay compensation only. 

5.      Clause 14(a) of the complaint provides 36 months from the date of commencement of the construction.  The opposite party has filed the statement of account relating to the complainant showing that the installment on start of excavation had become due on 31.07.2012.  Therefore, the date of commencement shall be treated as 31.07.2012 and if the period of 36 months + 3 months is stated in it, then due date of possession would be 31.10.2015.  The possession was offered on 29.08.2019.  Therefore, the complainant is entitled for delayed compensation from 01.11.2015 to 29.08.2019. 

6.      So far as the rate of delay compensation is concerned, Supreme Court in Wg. Cdr. Arifur Rahman Khan & Ors. Vs. DLF Southern Homes Pvt. Ltd., (2020) 16 SCC 769 and DLF Home Developers Ltd. Vs. Capital Greens Flat Buyers Association (2021) 5 SCC 537, held that delay compensation is payable in the form of interest @ 6% per annum on the deposit of the complainant.  Although the counsel for the complainant has relied upon the judgment of this Commission in CC/423/2016, Altaf Ahmed Lal & Anr. Vs. M/s Emaar MGF Land Ltd. & Anr. and other connected cases decided on 11.10.2021 in which delay compensation has been awarded @9% per annum but in view of the Supreme Court judgment, this Commission has no binding precedence over this Bench and therefore, we have to follow the judgment of the Supreme Court in case of contradiction.  In view of the aforesaid discussion, the complaint is partly allowed.  Opposite party no.1 is directed to pay the delay compensation to the complainant in the form of interest on their deposit @6% per annum from 01.11.2015 till 29.08.2019 within a period of two months from today.  

 
..................................................J
RAM SURAT RAM MAURYA
PRESIDING MEMBER
 
 
.............................................
BHARATKUMAR PANDYA
MEMBER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.