LAWS(NCD)-2022-1-55

SUNNY AHUJA Vs. RAHEJA DEVELOPERS LIMITED

Decided On January 03, 2022
Sunny Ahuja Appellant
V/S
Raheja Developers Limited Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present complaint is filed under sec. 21 read with Sec. 2 (c) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 by the Complainant in respect of a plot allotted to him in a project known as 'Raheja Aranya City', Sector 11 and 14, Phase I, Sohna Road, Gurgaon promoted by the Opposite Party, claiming deficiency of service due to delay in handing over possession of the plot allotted and claiming refund of amount deposited with compensation.

(2.) The brief facts of the case are that the Complainant, in response to the advertisements of the Opposite Party, booked a plot measuring 308 sq yards on 16/10/2012 by paying the booking amount of Rs.9,17,258.00. Plot number E ' 35 was allotted to the complainant by the OP and possession of the plot was promised within 36 months, with a grace period of 6 months of the signing of the Buyer's Agreement on 7/8/2014. Subsequent payments totaling approximately Rs.30.00 lakh were made between 2012-2014. In 2014, the OP informed the Complainant that in view of the fact that statutory approval for Phase I of the project, in which plot allotted to Complainant (E ' 35) was located could not be obtained, Plot no. E ' 70 in Phase II was being allotted to the Complainant. A fresh allotment letter dtd. 7/8/2014 was also issued. Payment made towards the previously allotted plot was adjusted towards the plot allotted in Phase II. Delivery was promised within 36 months with a six month grace period, i.e., by 7/2/2018. According to the Complainant Rs.57,91,638.00 was paid to the OP between 16/10/2012 to 19/3/2015 including the amount adjusted towards plot E ' 35. Thereafter, no demands for payments were made by the OP. The Complainant's averment is that there has been no progress in the project even as late as January 2020. He, therefore, does not wish to wait indefinitely and wishes to get a refund of his money. His claim is that the OP's action constitutes deficiency in service and unfair trade practice for which he seeks to be compensated. He has also filed two police complaints against the OP on 17/1/2019 and 23/1/2019.

(3.) The Complainant has approached this Commission with the following prayer: