RESERVED

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

                              UTTAR PRADESH, LUCKNOW

                               COMPLAINT NO. 61 OF 2018       

1. Uma Singh Titiyal

D/o Dr. Sher Singh Titiyal

R/o House No.86, Bhabha Nagar

Sanigawan Road, Kanpur-208021

2. Dr. Sher Singh Titiyal

R/o House No.86, Bhabha Nagar

Sanigawan Road, Kanpur-208021

                                                                                      ...Complainants

                                                     Vs.

Ansal Properties & Infrastructure Limited

1^st Floor, YMCA Campus, 13^th Floor

Rana Pratap Marg, Lucknow-226001

Through its Chairman/Directors

                                                                                      ...Opposite Party

BEFORE:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AKHTER HUSAIN KHAN, PRESIDENT

For the Complainant           :  Complainant in person.

For the Opposite Party        :  Sri Manvendra Pratap Singh, Advocate.              

Dated :  16-09-2019

                                            JUDGMENT

PER MR. JUSTICE A. H. KHAN, PRESIDENT

This is a complaint filed under Section 17 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 by complainants Miss. Uma Singh Titiyal and Dr. Sher Singh Titiyal against opposite party Ansal Properpties and Infrastructure Limited. Complainants have claimed following reliefs.

1. The opposite party be directed to deliver the physical possession of the Larchwood Villa, Unit No. E-1-0033 situate at Sector-E,Pocket-1 in Sushant Gold City, Lucknow.
2. That the opposite party be further directed to refund the excess amount of Rs.11,000/- paid for the unit till the refund of the same alongwith 18% interest per annum.
3. The opposite party be directed to pay interest @ 18% per annum on entire deposited amount of Rs.28,59,456/- till the date of payment of the same.

:2:

4. The opposite party be also directed to pay a sum of Rs.20,00,000/- as compensation for suffering of mental agony and physical torture which includes economical loss on account of living into a rented accommodation and incurring of huge expenses on to and fro in meeting officials of opposite party at Lucknow from Kanpur.
5. The opposite party be also directed to pay a sum of Rs.2,50,000/- as cost of litigation including lawyers fees, expenses and court fee of the instant case may also be awarded and may also award any such further reliefs as deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

As per complaint complainants booked villa No. E/1/47 in Larchwood scheme of opposite party situated in Sector-E, Pocket-1 Sushant Golf City, Lucknow and deposited booking amount of Rs.3,37,200/-. Thereafter agreement was executed between complainants and opposite party on 03-06-2008 for said villa and after deducting amount of discount Rs.30,28,056/- was agreed price of villa. Complainants paid Rs.28,59,456/- to opposite party till 16-07-2008. Only 5% of price of villa was due for payment at the time of delivery of possession. But opposite party failed to make construction of villa allotted to complainants. Consequently opposite party offered another villa bearing Unit No. 0033 in same scheme vide letter dated 07-01-2011 and issued allotment letter dated 10-05-2012 in favour of complainants. The price of villa mentioned in this allotment letter was incorrect and Rs.2,00,000/- paid by complainants as preferential location charges for the previous villa was not reflecting in the allotment letter. The price of realloted villa is Rs.31,72,000/- and after making deduction of amount of discount allowed to complainants and amount paid by complainants as preferential location charge the cost of realloted villa is Rs.28,59,456/- only whereas complainants have already paid Rs.28,59,456/-. Thus complainants are entitled to refund of Rs.11,000/-.

As per complaint opposite party failed to deliver possession of reallotted unit also within period promised. Therefore feeling aggrieved

:3:

complainants have filed complaint seeking above reliefs.

Opposite party has filed written statement wherein it has been stated that the complainants have themselves made breach of agreement and have stopped payment.

In written statement it has been further stated that the complaint is barred by limitation.

Affidavit of complainant No.01 Miss. Uma Singh Titiyal has been filed alongwith annexures in support of complaint.

Opposite party has adduced no evidence.

Complainant No. 01 Miss. Uma Singh Titiyal appeared in person.

Learned Counsel Mr. Manvendra Pratap Singh appeared for opposite party.

I have heard both parties. I have perused records.

Admittedly opposite party has executed sale deed in favour of complainants and delivered possession of villa in question to complainants in compliance of order dated 17-12-2018 passed by State Commission in this complaint. Now the issues for determination are as to whether the complainants are entitled to compensation for delay in delivery of possession and as to whether complainants are entitled to refund of Rs.11,000/- alleged excess amount.

Copy of sale-deed dated 14-01-2019 has been filed by complainants which is admitted to both parties. Sale consideration of villa is Rs.29,51,790/-. Therefore, alleged excess payment of Rs.11,000/- to opposite party by complainants is not acceptable. As such complainants are not entitled to get refund of alleged excess payment of Rs.11,000/-.

Complainants have deposited Rs.28,59,456/- with opposite party till 16-07-2008 for the villa in question but they have been given possession of the villa on 14-01-2019 in compliance of order passed by State Commission. Even after depositing 95% of price of villa complainants have been deprived of possession for such a long time. Therefore complainants should be granted compensation for the delay in possession.

Considering all facts and circumstances of the case I am of the view that the complainants should be given interest on Rs.28,59,456/- deposited

:4:

by them at the rate of 6% per annum from 05-04-2016 which falls within two years from the date of filing of complaint till date of sale-deed that is 14-01-2019 to compensate them for the delay in delivery of possession.

Rs.10,000/- should also be paid to complainants as cost of litigation.

In view of conclusion drawn above complaint is allowedpartially and opposite party is ordered to pay interest to complainants on Rs.28,59,456/- deposited by them at the rate of 6% per annum from 05-04-2016 till 14-01-2019 as compensation for delay in delivery of possession.

Opposite party shall pay Rs.10,000/- also to complainants as cost of litigation.

Let copy of this order be made available to the parties positively within 15 days as per rules.

                                                                ( JUSTICE A H KHAN )

                                                                                 PRESIDENT

          Pnt.