Haryana

StateCommission

A/662/2016

MANOJ KUNDU - Complainant(s)

Versus

DLF HOMES PANCHKULA PVT.LTD. - Opp.Party(s)

SATYAWAN AHLAWAT

13 Jan 2017

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, HARYANA, PANCHKULA.

 

                                                F.A.No.662 of 2016

                                                          Date of Institution: 19.07.2016                         Date of Decision: 13.01.2017

 

Manoj Kundu S/o Sh.Pala Ram R/o House No.3197-98, Sector 11 U/E Jind District Jind.

…..Appellant

                                      VERSUS

1.      The Director Sales & Marketing, DLF Universal Ltd. SCO No.190-192, Sector 8-C, Chandigarh.

2.      M/s DLF, Homes Panchkula Pvt. Ltd., DLF Valley, Pinjore, Tehsil Kalka, District Panchkula through its Authorized Signatory/Officer.

          …..Respondents

 

CORAM:             Mr. R.K.Bishnoi, Judicial Member.

                   Mrs. Urvashi Agnihotri, Member.                                   

For the parties:  Mr.Arjun Sharma, Advocate counsel for the appellant.

Mr.Naveen Sheokand, Advocate counsel for the Respondents.                                   

 

F.A.No.989 of 2016

Date of Institution: 10/19.10.2016

Date of Decision: 13.01.2017

 

1.      The Director Sales & Marketing, DLF Universal Ltd. SCO No.190-192, Sector 8-C, Chandigarh.

2.      M/s DLF, Homes Panchkula Pvt. Ltd., DLF Valley, Pinjore, Tehsil Kalka, District Panchkula through its Authorized Signatory/Officer.

…..Appellants

Versus

 

 

Manoj Kundu S/o Sh.Pala Ram R/o House No.3197-98, Sector 11 U/E Jind District Jind.

 …..Respondent

CORAM:             Mr. R.K.Bishnoi, Judicial Member.

                   Mrs. Urvashi Agnihotri, Member.                                   

For the parties:  Mr. Arjun Sharma, Advocate counsel for the appellants.

Mr. Naveen Sheokand, Advocate counsel for the Respondent.

 

O R D E R

 

R.K.BISHNOI, JUDICIAL MEMBER :-

          This order will dispose of Appeal No.662 of 2016 filed by Manoj Kundu-complainant and Appeal No.989/2016 filed by  DLF-Opposite parties against the order dated 21.06.2016  passed by the learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Panchkula (for short ‘District Forum’), whereby complaint has been allowed.

2.      It was alleged by the complainant that he was second allottee of flat No.DVF-E6/20SF alongwith parking in DLF Valley, Panchkula and same was transferred in his name on 06.11.2013.  He paid entire amount to vendors.  As per clause No.11 (a) of Buyer’s Agreement dated 07.01.2011, construction of the flat was  to be completed within period of 24 months from the date of booking. However five years elapsed, but, construction was not completed by O.Ps. In case of delay in construction, O.Ps. were to pay  Rs.10/- per sq. ft. as per clause 15 of Buyer’s Agreement.  They requested O.ps to complete the construction, but, to no avail.

3.      O.Ps. filed reply controverting his averments and alleged that  project was spread over 175 acres of land situated at village Bhagwanpur, Islamnagar at Sector-3, Pinjore, Kalka. They had completed construction of all 222 independent floors on 74 plots and other 1553 built up units were nearing completion. Out of 1775 built-up units, occupation certificate was received for 222 units and 78 units were offered for possession to the owners. Possession was to be given within two years, but, there was stay on construction by Hon’ble Supreme Court vide order dated 19.04.2012 in SLP No.21786-88/2010. Vide order dated 06.04.2010, Hon’ble High court restrained them from creating third party right.  Operation of that order was stayed by Hon’ble Supreme Court on 23.07.2010 in an appeal filed by them. Delivery of possession of independent floors was delayed on account of force majeure.   He was informed about delay in project.  Vide order dated 12.12.2012 Hon’ble Supreme Court dismissed SLP and vacated stay order. Thereafter O.Ps. sought approval which was received on 06.09.2013 and thereafter construction was started.  Thus there was no unfair trade practice and deficiency in service on their part and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

3.      After hearing both the parties, learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Panchkula  (In short “District Forum”) allowed the complaint vide impugned order dated 21.06.2016 and directed as under:-

“(i)     To pay compensation by way of simple interest @ 12% per annum, after 32 months from the date of repurchase by him i.e. 06.11.2013, till possession is delivered to him.  The OPs shall also pay compensation at the rate of Rs.10/- per square feet of the super area of the flat after 32 months from the date of repurchase of the flat by him (i.e.) 06.11.2013.

(ii)      The opposite parties shall pay Rs.5,000/- as the cost of litigation complaint.”

4.      Feeling aggrieved therefrom, O.Ps. as well as complainant have preferred these appeal.

5.      Arguments heard. File perused.

6.      Learned counsel for O.Ps. argued that complainant is subsequent allottee. When he purchased this plot he was well aware about delay and cannot ask for compensation as opined by Hon’ble National Commission in Revision Petition No.525 of 2013 titled as Vatika Limited Vs. Rajneesh Aggarwal decided on 22.07.2014.

7.      This argument is of no avail. Hon’ble  National Commission has recently opined about compensation to be given to such like person while deciding complaint No.437 of 2014 titled as Satish Kumar Pandey & Anr. Vs. M/s Unitech Limited, alongwith other complaints, on 08.06.20015 wherein following observations  are made:-

“a.     The opposite party shall deliver possession of  the respective flats of the complainants to them on or before the last date stipulated in its letter dated 27.05.2015.

b.      The opposite party shall pay to (i) the original  allottees and (ii) to those who acquired the allotment by way of repurchase, within one year of the date of the initial Agreement of their respective flats, compensation in the form of simple interest at the rate of 12% per annum with effect from 36 months from the date of the initial agreement till the date possession is delivered to them.  The interest payable till 31.08.2015 shall be paid by 10.09.2015, in three equal installments, by the 10^th of each month i.e. by 10^th July, 2015, 10^th August, 2015 and 10^th September, 2015. Thereafter, compensation in the form of interest, in terms of this order, shall be paid on monthly basis by the 10^th of each succeeding month.

c.       Such of the complainants, who acquired  allotment of the flat by way of repurchase more than one year after the date of the initial allotment of their respective flats, shall be paid compensation by way of simple interest at the rate of 12% per annum, with effect from 36 months from the date of  repurchase by them, till possession is delivered to them.  They will also be paid compensation at the rate of Rs.5/- per square foot of the super area of their respective flat for the period between 36 months from the date of the initial Buyers Agreement of their respective flats and 36 months from the date of repurchase of the flat by them.

d.      The increase in service tax with effect from  01.06.2015 shall be borne by the opposite party, in all these cases.”

8.      Keeping in view the opinion of Hon’ble National Commission in Satish Kumar Pandey’s case (Supra) proper compensation has been given by the District Forum and there is no reason to disagree with the same. O.P. cannot derive any benefit from the cited case law because in that case the possession was already delivered, whereas it is not so in the present case. Resultantly appeals fail and they are hereby dismissed.

9.        The statutory amount of Rs.25,000/- deposited at the time of filing the appeal bearing No.989 of 2016 be refunded to the appellants against proper receipt and identification in accordance with rules.

10.    The original judgement be attached with appeal No.662 of 2016 and certified copies be attached with appeal No.989 of 2016.

 

January 13th, 2017

Mrs.Urvashi Agnihotri, Member, Addl.Bench

R.K.Bishnoi, Judicial Member Addl.Bench

 

S.K.