No written version has been filed by the opposite party. It is, however, stated by the counsel for the opposite party that opposite party has not received copy of the complaint and, therefore, written statement could not be filed. However, record shows otherwise. Right to file written statement is closed. 2. Counsel for the complainants has confined his relief to the refund of the deposited amount alongwith compensation of 12% p.a. on the said deposited amount from the date of respective deposits and litigation expenses @ 10,000/- as has been granted by this Commission in identical matters i.e. Consumer Complaint No. 1874 of 2016 titled Hanish Kumar Dewan & anr. Vs. M/s Unitech Ltd. decided on 07.11.2017, Consumer Complaint No. 1232 of 2015 titled Ravikant Bhatt & Anr. Vs. M/s Unitech Ltd. decided on 22.09.2016 and Consumer Complaint No. 199 of 2015 titled Rakhee Dey & Ors. Vs M/s Unitech Ltd. decided on 31.07.2017. 3. I have heard the arguments of the parties. 4. Undisputedly, facts of this complaint are that Mr.Harpreet Singh, predecessor-in-interest of the complainants applied for allotment of floor in the project of the opposite party, namely, ‘Anthea Floors, Wildflower Country, which the opposite party was to develop in Sector-70, Gurgaon. Mr. Harpreet Singh was allotted floor No.01 in Block-F on plot No.0100 measuring 1514 sq. ft. The total consideration agreed between the parties was Rs.88,50,428/-. 5. Harpreet Singh sold his interest in the said floor to the complainants. The allotment letter executed in favour of Harpreet Singh was subsequently endorsed in favour of the complainants. Customer code of the complainants was AF0522A. The possession was to be delivered within 36 months from the date of agreement i.e. by 07.12.2014. The complainants in total has deposited a sum of Rs.41,36,301/- with the opposite party on various dates. It is also averred by the complainants that almost four years have elapsed but the project has still not been completed and no construction or development work is being carried out at the site. Hence, they have claimed refund of their deposited amount of Rs. 41,36,301/- which they had deposited on different dates. 5. No defence has been put up by the opposite party since no written version was filed within the stipulated period. By way of affidavit, the complainant has proved all his contentions. 6. It, therefore, stands proved that opposite party had failed to hand over possession of the subject apartment to the complainant within the stipulated period. This is clear deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. 7. In view of these facts, I allow the present complaint with following directions: i. The opposite party shall refund the entire principal amount of Rs.41,36,301/- received from the complainants alongwith compensation in the form of simple interest @12% per annum with effect from the date of each payment till the date on which the entire principal amount alongwith compensation in the form of interest is actually paid. ii. The opposite party shall also pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- as the cost of litigation to the complainants. iii. The payment in terms of this order shall be paid within three months from today. With these directions, the complaint stands disposed off. | 
