Delhi

StateCommission

CC/10/282

HARVINDER SINGH SETHI - Complainant(s)

Versus

UNITECH LTD. - Opp.Party(s)

29 Jul 2015

ORDER

IN THE STATE COMMISSION: DELHI

(Constituted under Section 9 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986)

                                            Date of Decision: 29/07/2015

Consumer Complaint No. 282/2010

In the matter of:

Shri Harvinder Singh Sethi

S/o Late Sh. Harbans Singh Sethi,

D-11, Mayapuri Industrial Area,

Phase-II, Main Road,

New Delhi-110064                                                       Complainant

 

Versus

 

M/s. Unitech Limited

P-7, Sector-18,

Noida-210301, UP                                                     Opposite Party

 

Also at:

6, Community Centre,

Saket, New Delhi

 

Also at:

Level-1, South City-1,

NH-8, Gurgaon-1,

Haryana

 

CORAM

 

SH N P KAUSHIK                              -                  Member (Judicial)

SH. S.C. JAIN                          -                  Member

 

1.       Whether reporters of local newspaper be allowed to see the judgment?

2.       To be referred to the reporter or not?

 

N P KAUSHIK – MEMBER (JUDICIAL)

 

JUDGEMENT

 

The case of the Complainant is that he booked a flat in one of the projects of M/s. Unitech Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as OP) known as “Unitech Habitat” on plot No. 9, Phase-II, Greater Noida, Distrcit Gautam Budh Nagar, UP. Complainant had made an application for allotment on 13/06/2006. In pursuance to the aforesaid application, OP allotted an Apartment bearing No. 1203, Floor 12, measuring 2098 sq. ft. Complainant made fresh payment to the OP in terms of the schedule of payment and in all paid an amount of Rs. 54,80,467/-.

 

In terms of ‘flat buyers agreement’, physical possession of the flat was to be handed over to the Complainant within a period of 36 months from the date of allotment i.e. on or before June 2009.  Complainant visited the site and found that no construction activity was going on there. No reply was given to the Complainant on his visit to the office of the OP. Finally, the Complainant sent a legal notice dated 12/3/2010, calling upon the OP to allot him the aforesaid flat. On receipt of the legal notice, the OP sent a letter dated 12/4/2010 to the Complainant.  Vide said letter, Complainant was asked to pay to the OP the outstanding dues of Rs. 12,25,134/.  In response to the said letter, the Complainant wrote to the OP that the OP failed to give possession of the flat and consequently he was required to pay an amount of Rs. 54,80,467/- alongwith interest @10% p.a.

 

‘Flat Buyer’s Agreement’ i.e. letter of allotment dated 13/6/2006 is not in dispute.  OP was required to hand over physical possession of the flat within a period of 36 months from the date of entering into the agreement with the Complainant.  Admittedly, no allotment of the flat was made by the OP uptil June 2009. 

       

The sole defence raised by the OP is that the ‘flat buyer’s agreement’ provides remedy of arbitration to the Complainant in the event of failure of the OP to abide by the terms of the agreement. Provisions contained in Consumer Protection Act, 1986 provide that the arbitration agreement, if any, between the parties is an additional remedy available to the aggrieved. In other words proceedings under Consumer Protection Act, 1986 are not barred even if the agreement between the parties provides for arbitration.

 

During the course of arguments Ld. Counsel for the OP has argued that in case of default on the part of the OP, compensation to tune of Rs. 5 per sq. ft. per month was required to be paid to the Complainant. Hon’ble National Commission in the case of ‘Swarn Talwar and 2 Ors. Vs. Unitech Ltd.’ (CC No. 347/2014 decided on 14.08.2015) has held that such clauses in the agreement are relevant only in cases where buyer accepts possession of the flat despite delay. In the present case buyer has prayed for refund of the amount deposited by him alongwith interest and compensation.   

 

Prices of real estate have gone high.  Costs of construction too have escalated.  Dream of the complainant of having his own home is shattered.  In the circumstances, we direct the OP to pay to the Complainant as under:-

 

a.     to refund the amount of Rs. 54,80,467/- alongwith interest @ 10% p.a. from the date of deposit.

b.     to pay to the complainant compensation to the tune of Rs. 5 lacs for harassment, inconvenience and mental agony caused by the OP.

c.      to pay to the complainant the litigation charges of Rs. 2,50,000/-.

 

All the abovesaid payments shall be made by the OP to the Complainant within a period of 90 days from today failing which the OP shall be liable to pay interest @ 24% per annum on the amount accruing after the expiry of the period of 90 days from today.

 

Files be sent to the Record Room. 

 

 

(N P KAUSHIK)

MEMBER (JUDIUCIAL)

 

 

 

(S.C.  JAIN)

MEMBER