NCDRC

NCDRC

CC/938/2015

NARESH KUMAR ASIJA & ANR. - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/S. UNITECH LTD. - Opp.Party(s)

MR. ANIL SURA & MR. SANDEEP PHOGAT

01 Sep 2016

ORDER

NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
NEW DELHI
 
CONSUMER CASE NO. 938 OF 2015
 
1. NARESH KUMAR ASIJA & ANR.
R/O. D-56A.F.F., SOUTH CITY-II, SOHNA ROAD,
GURGAON
2. VAISHALI ASIJA
R/O. D-56A.F.F., SOUTH CITY-II, SOHNA ROAD,
GURGAON
...........Complainant(s)
Versus 
1. M/S. UNITECH LTD.
UNITECH HOUSE, 6, COMMUNITY CENTRE,
SAKET, NEW DELHI-110017
...........Opp.Party(s)

BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.K. JAIN,PRESIDING MEMBER

For the Complainant :
Mr. Krishan Kumar, Advocate
For the Opp.Party :
Mr. Sahil Sachdeva, Advocate

Dated : 01 Sep 2016
ORDER

JUSTICE V.K. JAIN (ORAL)

 

The complainants, who are  husband and wife, booked a residential villa with the opposite party in a Group Housing Complex known as ‘Alder Grove Nirvana Country II’, which the opposite party was to develop in Sector 71 & 72 of Gurgaon, for a total consideration of Rs.1,44,06,000/- exclusive of other  charges aggregating to Rs.1,38,272/-, thereby making a total consideration of Rs.1,45,44,272/-. Villa No.0106 in Block AG, having super area of 2646, was allotted to them by the opposite party on 2.6.2010. The parties then entered into Buyers Agreement dated 20.7.2010. The possession of the villa was agreed to be delivered within 24 months from the date of the Buyers Agreement, meaning thereby that it was to be delivered by 20.7.2012. The opposite party, however, has failed to even offer the possession of the said villa to the complainants despite having received a total sum of about Rs.1.27 crore from the complainants. Being aggrieved, the complainants are before this Commission seeking possession of the villa booked by them along with compensation.

2.  The complaints have been opposed by the opposite party, primarily on the grounds, which this Commission has repeatedly rejected in a number of Consumer Complaints, such grounds being the delay on the part of the authorities in according approvals, shortage of labour due to Commonwealth Games and implementation of schemes such as National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme and Jawahar Lal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission.  It is also alleged that by an order dated 16.7.2012, Punjab & Haryana High Court had stopped the usage of ground water for construction purposes and had permitted use of only treated water from the available Sewerage Treatment Plant but sufficient water from the Sewerage Treatment Plant was not available.  Another reason given by the opposite party for the delay in completion of the construction is the Notification issued by the Ministry of Environment and Forests, barring excavation of the top soil for manufacturer of bricks and consequent shortage of the bricks in the Region and restriction on mining in the Aravali Region which resulted in shortage of sand, which is a raw material used on the construction activities.  It is also claimed that Government of India had placed restriction and prohibition on new projects without obtaining the requisite environmental clearance and there was delay on the part of the Government in constitution of the Environment Impact Assessment Authority. It is also alleged in the reply that the opposite party is obliged to pay only agreed compensation of Rs.50/- per sq. yds for the period the possession has been delayed.

3.      A number of complaints filed by the allottees of villas in the above-referred project of the opposite party were decided by this Commission vide its order dated 3.5.2016 passed in CC No.382 of 2015 Aditya Mishra Vs. M/s Unitech Ltd. and connected matters. All those complaints were resisted by the opposite party on the identical grounds. All the pleas taken by the opposite party were rejected by this Commission relying upon its order dated 2.5.2016 passed in CC No.603 of 2014 Captain Gurtaj Singh Vs. Unitech Ltd.  and connected matters, Satish Kumar Pandey & Ors. Vs. M/s Unitech Ltd. - CC No.427 of 2014.  and Swarn Talwar & Ors. Vs. M/s Unitech Ltd - C.C. No.347 of 2014.

4.      In Aditya Mishra & Ors. (Supra), this Commission, during the course of hearing asked the learned counsel for the opposite parties as to when they will be able to complete the construction of Villas in all respects and offer possession to the complainants.  She stated on instructions that after completing the construction in all respects and obtaining the requisite completion certificate, the possession will be offered to the complainants within a maximum period of 21 months.

5.      On the principle of parity alone, the complainants are entitled to an identical relief. The complaint is, therefore, disposed of with the following directions:-

(1)     The opposite party shall unless already resumed, resume construction of the villas sold to the complainants on or before 01.10.2016. The construction shall be completed in all respects on or before 03.11.2017. The opposite party shall apply for and obtain the completion certificate in respect of the villas at its own responsibility and then offer possession to the complainants on or before 01.04.2018.

(2)         The opposite party shall pay compensation in the form of simple interest @ 12% per annum from the expected date of possession till the date on which the possession is actually offered to the complainants after completing the construction in all respects and obtaining the requisite completion certificate.

(3)         No separate compensation would be payable to the complainants either towards the rent if any paid by them or for the mental agony and harassment which they have suffered on account of the failure of the opposite party to perform its contractual obligation.

(4)         The opposite party shall also pay Rs. 10,000/- as the cost of litigation.

   (5)          The compensation for the period till 31.10.2016 shall be paid by the opposite party on or before 30.11.2016 whereas the compensation for the period from 01.11.2016 shall be paid by the 10th of each succeeding month.

 
......................J
V.K. JAIN
PRESIDING MEMBER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.