JITEN KUMAR DALAI Vs. ANTRIKSH REALTECH (P) LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present joint Complaint has been filed under Sec. 12(1)(c) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, as a class action on behalf of and for the benefit of all the allottees in the project 'ANTRIKSH SANSKRITI' situated at NH-24, Indirapuram, Ghaziabad (U.P.). Alongwith the Complaint, the Complainants also filed IA/9267/2017, an application for permission to file joint Complaint. This Commission, vide order dtd. 11/4/2018, allowed the application. Complainant No.1 is the authorized representative for other Complainants as stated in the affidavit.

(2.) The case of the Complainants is that in 2011 through advertisements Opposite Party No.1 expressed their intention to the General Public to develop the aforesaid project and to handover the flats to all purchasers within 30 months from the date of signing the Agreement with a grace period of 6 months. The allottees booked their respective flats in the Project and they were issued allotment letters. All allottees signed separate Agreements with the Opposite Party. According to the Complainants, the construction is still incomplete, even after passage of ten years from the date of the signing of the Agreement. The Opposite Party kept demanding payment of installments from the allottees without completing the project. Most of the Allottees, however, had deposited substantial amount for the flat, including other charges as per the demands raised by the Opposite Party. The Opposite Party never intimated the allottees any reason, whatsoever, for delay in completing the project. The flat purchasers made numerous visits to the office of the Opposite Party, sent various letters and e-mails enquiring the status of the project, but the Opposite Party did not respond to any request of the allottees. Further, the Opposite Party, without seeking consent from the allottees of the Project, increased the number of flats/units from 8 floors to 22 floors which was against the promise made in the brochure. This act of the Opposite Party reduced the common area and facilities in the Project. Alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the Opposite Party, the Complainants approached this Commission by filing the instant Consumer Complaint with the following prayer:

(3.) Opposite Party resisted the Complaint by filing the written statement by raising preliminary objection that this Commission had no jurisdiction to entertain the Complaint, as the project was registered with the Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA). On merits, it was stated that the Complainants approached this Commission with unclean hands, suppressed material facts. The Complaint was, therefore, liable to be dismissed. It was also contended that the Complaints did not qualify for class action suit as the flats were booked by the Complainants on different dates and the amounts were also deposited on different dates. It was also stated that some of the Complainants booked their flats in 2014 and their claim was pre-mature. Some of the Complainants had also cancelled their bookings and rebooked their flats afresh in 2017. It was stated that the Complainants did not make their respective payments on time. They were, therefore, not liable for any compensation. It was also stated that the Irrigation Department issued conditional NOC dtd. 29/4/2013 that possession of the flats in the project would not be handed over till completion of the construction work of embankment to hold the flood water as the project area was a low lying area. The embankment work was not completed by the Government till filing of the Compliant, due to which possession of the flats could not be handed over to the Complainants. Further, the drawings of the project were cancelled by Ghaziabad Development Authority in 2011, resubmitted on 23/8/2013 and sanctioned only on 23/9/2015. Due to the above cancellation and re-sanctioning of the drawings, considerable time was taken affecting the construction of the project as a force majeure condition. The Complaint is malafide and is filed to extract money from the Opposite Party, hence liable to be dismissed.