The Complainant/Respondents booked a residential flat in a project namely, “Woodbury Apartment”, which the Appellant Company was to construct at Zirakpur at Punjab. The price of the flat was agreed at Rs.26,80,095/-. The Appellant offered the possession of the allotted unit to the Complainant on 30.03.2010. The possession however was not accepted by the Complainant, who then approached the State Commission by way of a Consumer Complaint seeking refund of Rs.33,11,352/- which he had paid to the Appellant. 2. The Complaint was resisted by the Appellant, which admitted the allotment made to the Complainant as well as the payment received from him. It was inter alia stated in the written version, filed by the Appellant, that the Complainant had not come forward to take possession which had been offered to him in the year 2010. It was also stated that the occupancy certificate have been applied on 07.12.2017 and the delay in issuance of the occupancy certificate was attributable to the authorities and not to the developer. 3. The State Commission vide its order dated 21.12.2018, directed the Appellant to refund the amount of Rs.33,11,352/- to the Complainant, along with interests @ 12% per annum, from the date of each payment till the date of realization. Compensation quantified at Rs.1 lacs and the cost of litigation quantified at Rs.21,000/- was also awarded to him. 4. Being aggrieved from the order passed by the State Commission the Appellant is before this Commission, by way of this Appeal. 5. It is not in dispute, that the Appellant has not been able to obtain the requisite occupancy certificate in respect of the allotted flat even till date. In the absence of the requisite occupancy certificate neither the Appellant can deliver nor can the Complainant accept the possession the allotted flat. If this is done, it would be in contravention of the statutory provisions. 6. In First Appeal No. 418 of 2019, M/s Ansal Housing & Construction Limited & Anr. Vs. Sanjay Lal & Anr. decided on 30.08.2019, the Complainant had booked a residential unit in this very project. The possession was offered to them but was declined by them. They having approached the concerned State Commission by way of a Consumer Complaint, the said Commission directed to refund of the amount which they have paid to the Appellant with 12% interest and compensation quantified at Rs.50,000/-. Being aggrieved by the order passed by the State Commission, the Appellant company approached this Commission by way of this Appeal. Disposing of the said Appeal, this Commission inter alia held as under: 4. It is an admitted position that the requisite completion certificate has not been issued in respect of allotted flats. The submission of the learned counsel for the Appellants is that they had applied for the completion certificate in 2014 and since the completion certificate was not issued, they had also filed a writ petition before the Hon’ble High Court pf Punjab and Haryana. The Writ Petition filed by the Appellant was disposed of the representation made by the Appellants within a period of three months. A Contempt Petition stated to have been filed by the Appellants due to non-compliance of said order and a notice is stated to be issued and listed on 17.10.2019 for final disposal. As noted by this Commission in its order dated 01.07.2019 in F.A. No. 767 of 2019 Ansal Housing Limited –vs.-Jitender Mohan Sharma & Anr., even the basic services were not available in the project, at the time the possession was offered in the year 2011 as would be evident from the letter dated 16.06.2015 issued by Municipal Council, Zirakpur. The letter clearly showed that even the basic services such as sewer connection, water connection had not been provided till the date the letter was issued. Therefore, it can hardly be disputed that the possession offered to the Complainants on 08.08.2013 was only a paper possession. This finds corroboration from the fact that the Appellant applied for the completion certificate only in 2014, years after the offer of possession was made. 5. The Complainants cannot be expected to take possession of the allotted units till the requisite completion certificate is obtained. This is also the case of the Appellants that even today all the services are not available in the project. Be that as it may, neither the appellant can offer possession nor the Complainants can accept the same unless and until the requisite completion certificate is issued by the Municipal Council, Zirakpur. The complainants cannot be compelled to wait indefinitely for legal possession of the allotted unit, they having made the booking 11 years ago in the year 2008. The conduct of the appellant in offering paper possession in the year 2011 without completing even the basic amenities also leaves much to be desired. The direction of the State Commission for refund of the amount paid by the Complainants to the Appellant with compensation awarded by the State Commission was based upon a statutory provision, the said provision being Rule 17 of PAPRA Rules. Hence, the impugned order does not call for any interference by this Commission, in exercise of its appellate jurisdiction. The appeal is therefore disposed of with the following directions: (i) The appellant shall refund the entire amount received from the complainants to them alongwith compensation in the form of simple interest @ 12% per annum from the date of each payment till the date of impugned order till the date of refund. (ii) The payment in terms of this order shall be made within three months from today. 9. In view of the above referred decision, the Appeal is disposed of with the following directions: The Appellant shall refund the principal amount of Rs.33,11,352/- received from the Complainant along with the compensation in the form of simple interest @ 12% per annum, from the date of each payment till the date of refund.
The Appellant shall made payments in terms of this order within three months from today. | 
