Delhi

StateCommission

CC/1107/2017

VARUN ARORA - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/S ANSAL PROPERTIES & INFRASTRUCTURE LTD. - Opp.Party(s)

PAWAN KUMAR RAY

03 Feb 2020

ORDER

IN THE STATE COMMISSION : DELHI

(Constituted under Section 9 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986)

Date of Arguments :03.02.2020

Date of Decision :06.02.2020

COMPLAINT NO.1107/2017

In the matter of:

Mr. Varun Arora,

S/o. Suresh Arora,

R/o. H.No.52, Labour Chowk,

Samaypur, Delhi.                                                                ………Complainant

Versus

 

M/s. Ansal Properties &

Infrastructure Ltd.,

Regd. Office at:-

115 Ansal Bhawan,

16 Kasturba Gandhi Marg,

New Delhi-110001.                                                ……..Opposite Party

 

CORAM

Hon’ble Sh. O. P. Gupta, Member (Judicial)

1.     Whether reporters of local newspaper be allowed to see the judgment?                                                               Yes/No

2.      To be referred to the reporter or not?                                                                                                        Yes/No

Shri O.P. Gupta, Member (Judicial)

JUDGEMENT

1. The case of the complainant is that in September, 2009 he booked residential unit no.0114-B-0402 located at Revenue Estate of Village Badkhalsa tehsil and District Sonipat, Haryana named as “The Europa Residency” approximate super area of 975 sq. ft. and the basic sale price was 1725/- per sq. ft. excluding composite and other charges. Later on the OP increased the actual area of the flat to 1265.83 sq. ft.
2. Flat buyer agreement was executed on 21.05.10. OP was to hand over possession within 36 months from the date of execution of flat buyer agreement. The complainant has paid Rs.19,81,736.55. There has been a delay of about four years over and above the committed date of possession. So complainant sent email dated 29.01.17 requesting OP to refund the amount. OP replied vide email dated 01.04.17 that the request has been moved to the appropriate authority for approval vide email dated 24.04.17 OP confirmed that it was ready to refund at par against the flat and the amount will be refunded subject to submission of original  papers of the flat. Hence this complaint for directing OP to refund entire amount of Rs.19,82,000/- alongwith interest @18% p.a. compounded annually from the date of deposit till actual realisation, Rs.3 lakhs as compensation for mental harassment and unfair trade practice, Rs.50,000/- as cost of litigation.
3. The OP was served for 02.02.18 and put in appearance through its counsel Shri Robin Raju. Copy of complaint was supplied. OP failed to file WS within statutory period. Its right to file WS was closed vide order dated 10.10.18.
4.  In support of his case the complainant has filed his own affidavit in evidence.
5. I have gone through the material on record and heard the arguments. Since the OP has not refuted the case of the complainant, there is no reason to disbelieve the case of the complainant. Moreover the OP has agreed to refund the amount vide mail dated 24.04.17 so the only question remains is regarding interest. When the OP has retained and utilised the amount of the complainant for about 10 years, there is no reason why it should not pay interest.
6.  The OP is directed to refund the amount of Rs.19,82,000/- with interest @9% p.a. from the date of deposit till the date of refund.
7. Copy of the order be sent to both the parties free of cost.
8. File be consigned to record room.                                                                                                                                                                            (O.P. GUPTA)                                                                                         MEMBER (JUDICIAL)
   •