PER MR SUBHASH CHANDRA, MEMBER 1. This complaint is filed u/s 21(a)(i) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 seeking refund of the amount paid towards the sale consideration of Flat No. PGN-11-0005 admeasuring 1900 sq.ft. in the project Palm Gardens, Sector 83, Gurgaon of the Opposite Party on grounds of deficiency in service and unfair trade practice in not offering possession of the flat despite the receipt of several instalments of payment under a construction linked payment plan. 2. In brief, the facts are that the complainants had booked the above flat on 27.02.2014 and a Builder Buyers’ Agreement (in short, agreement) was signed on 28.03.2014 for a sale consideration of Rs.1,80,85,816/-. As per Clause 10(a) of the Agreement, the Opposite Party was required to give possession within 36 months with a grace period of six months of the date of agreement, i.e., by 28.06.2017. The complainants have averred that they have paid Rs.69,58,274/- in various instalments as on date. It is averred by the complainants that the agreement was a prepared document by the Opposite Party and that even though it had several one-sided and arbitrary clauses they had no option but to sign the same in view of the fact that a substantial amount had already been deposited with the Opposite Party. In view of the inordinate delay in handing over possession of the flat they have made several efforts to obtain a refund with compensation from the Opposite Party and having failed to do so they are now before us seeking the following reliefs:- “a. Direct the O.P. to refund the entire amount collected from the complainants towards the consideration of the Flat along with interest @18% p.a. on the amount paid by them from the date of collection of the amounts till it is actually returned to the complainants. b. Direct the O.P. to pay a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rs. Five lakhs only) towards mental agony and harassment and towards cost of litigation to the complainants.” 3. The Opposite Party has contested the complaint on the grounds that the agreement had a specific provision for compensation in clause 12(a) in case of delay and that the complainants had been the defaulters and were yet to pay a sum of Rs.1,14,05,015/- including an amount of Rs.34,28,676/- towards delayed payment charges. It is contended that the delay due to default by the construction company. However, an occupancy certificate dated 17.10.2019 was now available and an offer of possession had been made to the Complainants on 19.10.2019. It is contended that in view of the offer of possession the allottees are obliged to take over possession in view of the principle laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Ireo Grace Realtech Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Abhishek Khanna & Ors., I (2021)CPJ 60 (SC) and that as defaulters the Complainants were not entitled to equitable reliefs. It is also contended that as per the judgment passed in DLF Homes Panchkula Private Limited Vs. D.S. Dhandha and Ors., (2020) 16 SCC 318, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that when interest is awarded by way of damages, awarding additional compensation is unjustified. Award of compensation under different heads on account of singular default of not handing over possession under various heads is not sustainable. 4. We have heard the learned Counsels for the parties and perused the record carefully. During the course of arguments, the learned Counsel for the Complainants brought to our notice the order of this Commission in Rupika Arora & Anr. Vs. Emaar MGF Land Ltd. in CC No. 3277/2017 dated 13.06.2022 relating to the same project of the Opposite Party, wherein the Opposite Party was directed to refund the entire amount with interest @9% per annum from the dates of respective deposits till the actual payment to the complainants within a period of two months. 5. The facts of the instant case are covered by the order passed in Rupika Arora & Anr. Vs. Emaar MGF Land Ltd. (supra) and relate to the same project of the Opposite Party. Learned Counsel for the Opposite Party agrees that the above order pertains to the same project. In view of the foregoing, we are convinced that the instant Complaint is squarely covered by the order in Rupika Arora & Anr. Vs. Emaar MGF Land Ltd. (supra) and we accordingly order as follows:- - The Opposite Party is directed to refund the amount of Rs. 69,58,274/- deposited by the complainants with simple interest @9% p.a. from the date of respective deposits till the date of actual payment to the complainants.
- The above order be complied with within a period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.
6. The Complaint is accordingly disposed of. | 
