NCDRC

NCDRC

CC/601/2018

NARENDER SINGH & ANR. - Complainant(s)

Versus

UNITECH LIMITED - Opp.Party(s)

MR. RAM NARESH YADAV

31 Jul 2019

ORDER

NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
NEW DELHI
 
CONSUMER CASE NO. 601 OF 2018
 
1. NARENDER SINGH & ANR.
...........Complainant(s)
Versus 
1. UNITECH LIMITED
UNITECH HOUSE L-BLOCK, SOUTH CITY-1, GURGAON-122001,
HARYANA.
...........Opp.Party(s)

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

For the Complainant :
Mr. Ram Naresh Yadav, Advocate
For the Opp.Party :
Mr. Babanjeet Singh Mew, Advocate with Ms. Chitra, Advocate

Dated : 31 Jul 2019
ORDER

JUSTICE V.K.JAIN, PRESIDING MEMBER (ORAL)

 

          The complainants namely Mr. Narender Singh and Mrs. Shalini Narender booked a residential flat with the OP in a project namely ‘Anthea Floors – Wildflower Country’ which the OP was to develop in

-2-

Gurgaon.  Vide allotment letter dated 02.08.2011, flat no. D-01-0010 (Customer Code No.AF-0043) in the above referred project was allotted to the complainants who thereafter, executed an agreement with the OP on 04.10.2011.  As per clause 4(a)(i) of the said agreement, the possession was proposed to be delivered to the complainants within 36 months thereof, meaning thereby that the possession ought to have been offered by 04.10.2014.  The grievance of the complainants is that the possession has not been offered to them despite they having already paid Rs.35,49,479/- to the OP.  The complainants do not want to wait any more for the allotment of the flat and want refund of the amount paid by them to the OP alongwith compensation etc.

2.      The OP was duly served with the notice of the admission of the Consumer Complaint on 16.04.2018 to file its written version within the prescribed period of limitation.  The said written version was filed on 25.06.2018 alongwith I.A. No. 11773 of 2018 seeking condonation of delay in filing the written version.  Vide order dated 12.09.2018, the delay was condoned subject to payment of Rs.20,000/- as cost, which was to be paid within four weeks from the date of the order.  In the event of failure to pay the cost, the written version was to stand rejected without any further orders.  However, the cost imposed on the OP was

 

-3-

not paid and therefore, the written version was rejected vide specific order dated 13.02.2019. 

3.      The complainant has already filed affidavit by way of evidence.  I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. 

4.      It is pointed out during the course of hearing that in a Consumer Complaint being CC No.199 of 2015, Rakhee Dey & Ors. Vs. M/s Unitech Ltd. decided on 31.07.2017, this Commission has already directed refund to all the allottees of the above referred project who are interested in taking refund, alongwith compensation.  The present complaint having been instituted after the above referred order had been passed by this Commission, is not maintainable.  Therefore, this complaint is disposed of in terms of the order dated 31.07.2017 passed by this Commission in Rakhee Dey (supra).  Since the complainants are seeking refund of the amount paid by them to the OP, they shall be entitled to refund alongwith compensation in terms of the aforesaid order.  The payment shall be made within three months from today.

 

 
......................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.