1.       The present appeal has been filed under Section 19 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short “the Act”) by Parsvnath Developers Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the “builder company”) assailing the Order dated 27.09.2019 passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the “State Commission”) in complaint No. 490 of 2013 whereby the complaint was allowed.

2.       Heard learned counsel for the appellant (hereinafter referred to as the ‘builder company’) and the learned counsel for the respondent (hereinafter referred to as the ‘complainant’) and perused the record including the State Commission’s impugned Order dated 27.09.2019 and the memorandum of appeal.

3.       There is a delay of 18 days in filing the present appeal.  

In the interest of justice and considering the reasons mentioned in the application for condonation of delay, the delay in filing the appeal is condoned.

4.       The facts, in brief, are that the complainant had booked a flat bearing No. T6-302 in Tower No. T6,size 1855 sq. ft. in the project, namely, “Parsvnath Privilege” at Greater Noida for a total consideration of Rs. 52,86,750/- with car parking for an amount of Rs. 2,00,000/-. The complainant paid Rs. 10,00,000/-  vide cheque no. 611323 dated 30.04.2006. The complainant further paid an amount of Rs. 3,21,687/- in May, 2007. The complainant had entered into an agreement dated 21.07.2007 with the builder company and as per clause 10(a) of the agreement, the possession of the flat was to be handed over within thirty six months from the date of agreement. As per clause 4(a) of the agreement, the payment plan attached with this agreement has also been signed by the builder company. It is alleged that the possession has not been handed over to the complainant as the tower itself is not complete.

5.       Feeling aggrieved, the complainant has filed the complaint seeking refund of the paid amount i.e. Rs.13,21,687/ along with interest @24% p.a. and Rs. 26,43,374/- towards damages on account of loss of opportunity cost of money and also for unfair trade practice and compensation of compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- towards mental agony.

6.       The builder company contested the complaint by filing written statement stating that the complainant had made the payment only of Rs. 13,21,687/- and stopped further payment due on him and that the delay was due to global recession and re-scheduling the construction work. It is also stated that the matter involved complicated questions of facts and law which need to be proved by leading detailed oral as well as documentary evidence and the complaint is liable to be dismissed.

7.       After appreciation of the facts of the case, the State Commission, vide its order dated 27.09.2019 allowed the complaint and directed the builder company to pay an amount of Rs.13,21,687/- along with compensation in the form of interest @ 12% p.a. from the date of each deposit till realization along with Rs. 25,000/- towards cost of litigation.

8.       The builder company has filed the present appeal before this Commission for setting aside the impugned order dated 27.09.2019 of the State Commission.

9.       This Commission, vide its order dated 18.04.2022, issued notice to the complainant only on the limited question of interest.

10.     The counsel for the builder company strongly argued that in the matters of refund, the interest at the rate of 12% per annum awarded by the State Commission is on the higher side and also contrary to the judgments passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court and the rate of interest @12% per annum is liable to be set aside. In support of contentions, learned counsel for the builder company has place reliance on the following cases:

a.  In the case of "Ireo Grace Realtech Pvt. Ltd. vs. Abhishek Khanna & Ors." [Civil Appeal No. 5785/2019 & other connected Appeals decided on 11.01.2021]', the Hon'ble Supreme Court has awarded delay compensation in the form of simple interest @9% p.a. on the amount deposited by the Complainants. [AIR 2021 SCC 437].

b. In the case of "Suncity Projects Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. vs. Sandeep Kumar Goel & Anr." [First Appeal No. 856 of 2021], this Hon'ble Commission while partly allowing the said appeal has reduced the interest awarded by State Commission to 9% per annum.

c. Further this Hon'ble Commission has partly allowed a complaint filed by the real estate allottee in the matter of "Dhwanit Parmar vs. Parsvnath Developers Ltd." [Consumer Complaint No. 1485 of 2015], wherein refund has been allowed with interest @9% per annum.

11.     The counsel for the complainant vehemently stated that the hard earned money of the complainants is blocked with the builder company for a protracted period without any return in cash or kind, regarding the troubles and travails faced by the complainants, therefore, the rate of interest @12% per annum awarded by the State Commission is just and equitable and commensurate with the loss and injury suffered by the complainant. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on the decision rendered in the case of M/s Ashoka Investment Co. vs. M/s United Towers India (Pvt. Ltd.)., civil appeal no. 4913 of 2015, decided on 11.10.2022.

12. The question which falls for our consideration is as to whether the rate of interest at the rate of 12% per annum awarded by the State Commission is just and reasonable.

13.     The decision rendered in the case of M/s Ashoka Investment Co. vs. M/s United Towers India (Pvt.) Ltd. (supra) is not applicable in view of the judgment of the larger bench of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Ireo Grace Realtech Pvt. Ltd. vs. Abhishek Khanna & Ors. (supra).

14.     Having considered the facts that the complainant had paid an amount of Rs.13,21,687/- upto the year 2007 and the said amount is blocked for a long period and in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and this Commission, we are of the view that the rate of interest at the rate of 9% per annum is just and equitable, commensurate with the loss and injury suffered.

15.     As such we modify the award made by the State Commission to the extent that the builder company shall refund the amount of Rs.13,21,687/- with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the respective dates of deposit till the date of actual payment and Rs.25,000/- as cost of litigation. The order be complied with within four weeks from today, failing which, it shall carry interest at the rate of 12% per annum.

16.     The appeal stands disposed of in above terms. All pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.