1.         This appeal under section 19 of The Consumer Protection Act, 1986 is in challenge to the Order dated 27.09.2018 of the State Commission in complaint no. 496 of 2017.

When the matter was taken up in the forenoon, Ms. Kanika Agnihotri, learned counsel appeared for the appellant builder co. and requested for an interlude to seek instructions. The matter was posted to the afternoon. When the matter was taken up in the afternoon, Ms. Sneha Kaila and Mr. Gandharv Garg, learned proxy counsel appeared for the appellant builder co. and made submissions on instructions.

Mr. Akul Mehandru, learned counsel appeared throughout for the respondent no. 1 complainant.

2.         Heard. Perused the record.

The matter pertains to a builder-buyer dispute. The award made by the State Commission vide its impugned Order dated 27.09.2018 is reproduced below for reference:

The complaint is, therefore, allowed and opposite parties are directed to refund the entire deposited amount of Rs. 27,53,699/- to the complainant along with compound interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of respective deposits till realization. In addition to this complainant is awarded compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- on account of mental agony and physical harassment and Rs. 21,000/- as litigation expenses.

3.         Learned proxy counsel for the appellant builder co. submits, on instructions, that the builder co. is willing to refund the amount of Rs. 27,53,699/- deposited by the complainant with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the respective date(s) of deposit till actual realisation along with lumpsum compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- and cost of litigation of Rs. 21,000/-. Learned proxy counsel also submits, on instructions, that the amount as any deposited by the builder co. with the State Commission in compliance of this Commission’s interlocutory Order dated 27.05.2019 along with interest if any accrued thereon may be forthwith released to the complainant and the balance awarded amount will be made good within six months from today and in order to ensure the same post-dated cheques will be duly given to the complainant. Learned proxy counsel further requests that this case may not be treated as a precedent and the issues involved may be kept open.

5.         Learned counsel for the complainants submits, on instructions, that the afore terms are acceptable to the complainant.

6.          In the wake of the above submissions nothing more survives for adjudication in this appeal. The same is thus disposed of with the following directions:

The award made by the State Commission is modified to the extent that the builder co. shall refund the amount of Rs. 27,53,699/- deposited by the complainant with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the respective date(s) of deposit till actual realisation along with lumpsum compensation of Rs. 1,00,,000/- and cost of litigation of Rs. 21,000/-. The amount as any deposited by the builder co. with the State Commission in compliance of this Commission’s interlocutory Order dated 27.05.2019 along with interest if any accrued thereon shall be forthwith released by the State Commission to the complainant. The balance awarded amount shall be made good by the builder co. to the complainant within six months from today, failing which the State Commission shall undertake execution, for ‘enforcement’ and for ‘penalty’, as per the law.  

7.         This Order has been made on consent. As such the decision in this case shall not be treated as a precedent. And the issues involved are kept open.

8.         The Registry is requested to send a copy each of this Order to the parties in the appeal and to their learned counsel as well as to the State Commission immediately. The stenographer is requested to upload this Order on the website of this Commission immediately.       

9.   ‘Dasti’, in addition, to facilitate timely compliance.