1.          The admitted facts of the case are that the Complainants had booked an Apartment in the project of the Opposite Party called “DLF Capital Greens” situated at Shivaji Marg, Moti Nagar, New Delhi. The Complainant was issued a letter dated 26.09.2009 confirming the booking of the unit. Complainant opted for Down Payment Plan and were allotted apartment No.CGT-246, 24^th Floor, T-Block, Unit 6 in the said project. An Apartment Buyer’s Agreement was executed between the parties on 03.06.2010. The total consideration amount of the unit was Rs.1,13,96,125/-. The Opposite Party vide their letter dated 29.09.2009, showed various benefits of availing the Down Payment Plan to the complainant, to which complainant in addition to sum of Rs.7,50,000/- already paid on 26.09.2009, made further payments to avail the Down Payment Plan.  Approximately 92% of the total sale consideration to the tune of Rs.1,13,96,125/- was paid to the opposite party by 24.10.2009.  However, just two months before giving possession on 25.09.2012, the opposite party invoked force majeure conditions and sought 16 months delay and offered two options to the complainant i.e. (i) continue with the allotment and agree with the delay completing the construction or (ii) cancel the allotment and accept the refund of the money receiving by the company along with simple interest of 9% per annum. However, vide letter dated 26.02.2013 opposite party demanded Rs.2,28,262/- as cost towards increase of saleable area by 29.03.2013, which was paid by the complainant.  Even after payment of the final instalment on 03.04.2017 even though possession was to be handed over within 30 days from the date of final payment, possession was handed over only on 21.01.2019.

On these contentions, the present Complaint had been filed and several reliefs had been sought on behalf of the Complainants.

2.            The Complaint has been contested by the Opposite Party. They have justified their action and have submitted that the delay had occurred on ground of several necessary approvals on the part of the competent authorities and several other reasons beyond their control. The period of handing over of possession was clearly held out to be tentative as the same was subject to force majeure conditions, which were clearly defined both in the booking application form as well as in the agreement.  It is further contended that the Complainant has already been offered possession vide order dated 27.06.2017 and they have not come forward to make the complete payment and take possession and delay in taking possession was not their fault. On these contentions, it is submitted that the Complaint is liable to be dismissed.

3.            Parties led their evidences and filed written synopsis. I have heard the arguments and perused the relevant record.

4.            During the course of arguments, Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the parties submit that this case is covered under the order of this Commission in “Capital Greens Flat Buyer Association vs. DLF Universal Limited & Anr.” decided on 03.01.2020 wherein while allowing the Complaint, following directions were issued:

“37. For the reasons stated hereinabove, the complaints are disposed of with the following directions:

1.      The OP is entitled to the additional demand on account of     

          increase in the super area of the apartments.

2. The OP is not entitled to car parking charges.
3. The OP is not entitled to club charges.
4. The allottees shall be entitled to early payment rebate and     

timely payment rebate, wherever they have complied with the terms on which the said rebates were offered by the developer or wherever the benefit of the said rebates was extended to them, either by the developer itself or by this Commission.

5. The OP shall pay compensation in the form of simple interest @ 7% per annum from the expected date for delivery of possession till the date on which the possession was actually offered to the allottees. In case of subsequent purchasers, the period expected for the delivery of possession will be computed from the date of purchase by them. If the possession was delayed solely on account of the allottee having not executed the Indemnity-cum-Undertaking, prescribed by the OP, the compensation in the form of simple interest @ 7% per annum shall be payable with effect from the expected date for delivery of possession till the date on which the consumer complaint by / on behalf of such an allottee was instituted. The compensation shall be paid within a period of three months from today.
6. The car parking charges and club charges wherever already       

paid to the developer shall be refunded to the concerned allottee within three months from today, failing which the said charges shall carry interest @ 9% per annum from the date of this order, till the date of refund.

7. The conveyance deed in favour of the allottees shall be  

executed within three months from today, subject to payment of outstanding dues, if any, payable by the allottees to the developer, in terms of this order and the requisite stamp duty and registration charges.

8. In CC/351/2015 and CC/2047/2016, the developer shall pay

Rs.50,000/- as the cost of litigation in each complaint, whereas in the other consumer complaints, the developer shall pay Rs.25,000/- as the cost of litigation in each complaint.”

5.      It was also submitted that, before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the Civil Appeals Nos.3864-89 of 2020 titled as “DLF Home Developers Limited (earlier known as DLF Universal Limited) And Another vs. Capital Greens Flat Buyers Association, (2021) 5 SCC 537” some directions of this Commission in Capital Greens Flat Buyer Association (supra) were modified as below:

“13. Accordingly, we allow the appeals in part to the following extent:

13.1 The compensation on account of delay in handing over possession of the flats to the flat buyers is reduced from 7% to 6%.

13.2 The direction for the refund of parking charges and club charges and interest on these two components shall stand set aside.

14. We clarify that the directions of NCDRC are upheld, save and except, for the above two modifications in terms of paras 13.1 and 13.2 above. The payment @ 6% shall be made after making due adjustments for the compensation for delay at the contractual rate (where it has been paid in terms of the agreement to the flat purchasers). The order shall be complied with within a period of two months from today.”

6.            It was jointly prayed by the learned counsel on instructions from the respective parties that the order in this Complaint be passed on these lines.

7.            In view of the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, the complaint is disposed of on following terms with the consent of the parties:

1. The Opposite Party is entitled to the additional demand on account of increase in the super area of the apartment;

ii.             The Opposite Party shall be entitled for the car parking charges, if applicable;

iii. The Opposite Party shall be entitled for the club charges, if applicable;

iv. The allottee shall be entitled to early payment rebate and timely payment rebate, if they have complied with the terms on which the said rebates were offered by the Developer or wherever the benefit of the said rebates was extended to them, either by the developer itself or by this Commission, if applicable;

v. The Opposite Party shall pay compensation in the form of simple interest @ 6% p.a. from the expected date of delivery of possession till the date on which the possession was actually offered to the allottees.

vi. The Conveyance Deed in favour of the allottees shall be executed within three months from today, subject to payment of outstanding dues, if any, payable by the allottee to the Developer, in terms of this order and the requisite stamp duty and registration charges.”

vii. The Developer shall pay ₹50,000/- as cost of litigation to the Complainants.

               The Complaint is accordingly disposed of.