ORDER

1.      This relates to a builder-buyer dispute.

2.      Heard learned counsel for the appellant builder co.

Perused the material on record, including inter alia the impugned Order dated 01.10.2020 of the State Commission and the memorandum of appeal.

3.      In the interest of justice, to provide fair opportunity to the appellant builder co., to settle the matter on merit, the delay in filing the appeal is condoned.

4.      The award made by the State Commission vide its Order of 01.10.2020 reads as below:

15. In view of my above discussion, this complaint is allowed and following directions are issued to the opposite parties:-

1(i) to deliver physical possession of the flat in question, complete in all respects along with all the promised amenities and ‘Completion and Occupation Certificates’ and all the approvals from the concerned competent authority subject to payment of balance sale consideration of the flat, if any, without interest or penal interest,;

1(ii) to execute the sale/conveyance deed and get the same registered in the names of the complainants for which the expenses shall be borne by them.

1(iii) to pay compensation for causing financial loss and depriving the complainants of the use of the said amount of ₹18,01,290/- during the period the same remained with opposite parties at the rate of 12% per annum with effect from after the expiry of the promised date of delivery of possession i.e. 1.5.2012 on the amount of ₹ 14,51,751/- and on the amounts of ₹ 3,47,540/- and ₹ 2,000/- from the dates of respective deposits till the date of actual delivery of possession of the flat in question; and

1(iv) to pay ₹25,000/- as composite compensation, for mental tension and harassment suffered by the complainants including litigation costs.

16. Opposite parties shall adjust the amount of compensation and litigation costs, as directed at 1(iii) and 1(iv) towards the amount payable by the complainants, if any, towards the price of the flat in question. In case opposite parties fail to delivery the possession, as ordered above, then in the alternative following directions are issued to them:-

2(i) to refund the amount of ₹18,01,290/- along with compensation for causing financial loss and depriving the complainants of the use of the said amount during the period the same remained with them at the rate of 12% per annum with effect from the different dates of deposits of different amounts till the date of actual payment; and

2(ii) to pay ₹25,000/-, as composite compensation, on account of mental tension and harassment suffered by the complainants including litigation costs.

5.      Learned counsel for the appellant builder company submits, on instructions, that the appellant builder company is ready and willing to unconditionally refund the amount of Rs.18,01,290/- deposited by the respondent complainant with reasonable interest and pay Rs. 25,000/- as the composite compensation on account of mental tension and harassment including cost of litigation awarded by the State Commission.

He further submits, on instructions, that the appellant builder company wishes to restrict and confine its appeal before this Commission only to the question of rate of interest on the amount deposited by the respondent complainant, which should be just and reasonable and not 12% per annum as awarded by the State Commission.

The submissions, made on instructions, are recorded.

6.      It is noted that the prayer made in the memorandum of appeal is for setting aside the impugned Order dated 01.10.2020 of the State Commission.

7.      It is further noted that respondents complainants booked a residential flat vide application dated 14.09.2008. They deposited total Rs.18,01,290/- with the appellant builder company between 01.10.2008 and 20.08.2016. The appellant builder company was not in a position to offer possession of the subject unit to the respondent complainant till the date the State Commission made its award i.e. till 01.10.2020. The appellant builder company is still not in a position to offer possession on the date of arguments on admission before this Commission i.e. on 22.03.2021.

A builder company cannot retain the amount deposited by a consumer indefinitely or unreasonably, indefinite or unreasonable holding of the amount deposited by a consumer cannot continue ad nauseam, ad infinitum.

8.      It is deemed lawful, just, equitable and conscionable to summarily dismiss the instant first appeal no. 916 of 2020, with liberty to the appellant builder company to file appeal, afresh, within thirty days from today, after refunding the entire amount deposited by the respondents complainants (Rs.18,01,290/-) and after paying the composite compensation including cost of litigation (Rs.25,000/-), strictly restricting and confining its appeal only and only to the question of rate of interest on the amount deposited by the respondents complainants.

9.      The Registry is requested to send a copy each of this Order to the appellant builder company and to the respondents complainants, as well as to the learned counsel for the appellant builder co., within three days from today. The stenographer is requested to upload this Order on this Commission’s website today positively.