JUSTICE MS DEEPA SHARMA, PRESIDING MEMBER 1. The brief facts relevant for the disposal of the present consumer complaint are that the complainants had jointly booked a residential flat on 12.07.2007 with the opposite party and was allotted apartment no. 703, 7th Level, Tower 01, Block – 03 in the OPs project Unitech Grande, Sector 96, 97 and 98 Noida (UP). As per the allotment letter dated 12.07.2007, the total consideration of the apartment was Rs.87,04,731/- and the possession of the said apartment was to be delivered by 30.09.2010. Till date the complainant has paid in all a sum of Rs..83,49,000/- on various dates. The possession of the apartment was to be delivered by January 2012. It is the case of the complainant that after the expiry of the stipulated period, the possession of the apartment has not yet been handed over to them. Hence, the complainant has filed the present complaint praying for delivery of possession of the apartment in question completed in all respect Or in the alternative, refund of Rs.83,49,000/- along with interest @ 18% per annum from the respective dates of payments till realisation; and Rs.20,00,000/- towards damages for mental torture and undue hardship and award of Rs.5,00,000/- towards litigation cost. 2. The opposite party was duly served and they have filed their written statement, which was taken on record, however, they have not disputed the deposit of such amounts with them. It is also not disputed that they could not hand over the apartment within the stipulated period. The complainant filed the rejoinder and evidence by way of affidavit. Thereafter, the opposite party was proceeded ex parte vide order dated 11th April 2018. 3. I have heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the complainant. 4. During the course of the argument, the learned counsel for the complainant states that he confines his prayer only to the directions which has been issued by this Commission in the case of Indar Dhawan and Anr. vs M/s Unitech Limited (Habitat) decided on 17th April 2018 (Consumer Case no. 1141 of 2017) and prays for no other relief. 5. The complainant by way of un-contradicted testimony has proved that the opposite party has failed to hand over the possession of the apartment within the stipulated period. They have also confined their relief only to the refund of the deposited amount. 6. In view of the earlier stand of this Commission in Consumer Case no. 1141 of 2017 – Indar Dhawan and Anr. (Supra), I allow the present consumer complaint with the following directions: The opposite party shall refund the entire amount of Rs.83,49,000/- to the complainants within six weeks from today along with simple interest @ 10% per annum from the date of payment of respective amount till the realisation of the amount. The opposite party shall pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- as cost of litigation to the complainant.
7. With these directions the present consumer complaint stands disposed of. |
