MAMTA MAURYA Vs. JAI PRAKASH ASSOCIATES LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present Consumer Complaint has been filed under Sec. 21(a)(i) read with Sec. 12(1)(c) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short "the Act) by the Complainants/Allottees of the Units in the Residential Housing Project under the name and style "The Kove" located at Jay Pee green Sports City, Sector 25, Yamuna Expressway Industrial Authority Area, Dankaur, District Gautam Budh Nagar, Uttar Pradesh (hereinafter to be referred as the Project), by Opposite Party Jaiprakash Associates Ltd., (hereinafter referred to as the OP Developer), interalia, alleging deficiency in service in not handing over the possession of the Units within stipulated period and seeking either possession with delayed compensation or refund of amount deposited by them along with reasonable interest and compensation.

(2.) Since the interest of the Complainants and other Unit buyers in the aforesaid Project is the same and identical reliefs have been claimed on behalf of all the Complainants, IA No. 2155 / 2017, an Application under Sec. 12(1)(c) of the Act has also been filed with the Complaint to treat the Complaint as a class-action Complaint. Vide Order dated 18 th September 2017, IA No. 2155 / 2017 was allowed and the Complaint was treated as filed under Sec. 12(1)(c) of the Act.

(3.) It has been averred in the Complaint that in the year 2010, Opposite Party Developer launched a Housing Project under the name and style of "The Kove" located at Jay Pee green Sports City, Sector 25, Yamuna Expressway Industrial Authority Area, Dankaur, District Gautam Budh Nagar, Uttar Pradesh. Allured by the exaggerated advertisement and the assurances given by the authorised representatives of the OP Developer that there would be every modern facility in the Project and the physical Possession would be handed over within stipulated period, the Complainants booked respective residential Units in the said Project in the year 2010-2012 by filing up the Application Form but copy of the Forms were supplied to some of the Complainants only. The Application Forms contained the Standard Terms and Conditions which were to be followed by both the Parties. It is further averred that certain terms and conditions mentioned in the Application Form were unfair and biased. Complainants were allotted distinct Units through Provisional Allotment letters by the OP Developer. In the Provisional Allotment letters, it was assured that the possession of the booked Units would be handed over within a period of 42 months. It was alleged that at the time of issuance of Provisional Allotment Letters, when the Complainants asked the OP Developer to execute Builder Buyer Agreement (hereinafter referred to as the Agreement), they were assured that the Agreements would be executed soon and the legal Department of the OP Developer is in the process of execution of the Agreement. During the passage of time when the Agreements were not executed, on enquiry made by the Complainants, the OP Developer kept delaying execution of Agreement on one pretext or the other. Despite several repeated requests and having received a lot of money from the Complainants, the OP Developer had not executed the Agreement with them till the date of filing of the Complaint. Relying upon the name and reputation of the OP Developer, the Complainants kept on depositing the amount as per demand made by the OP Developer against the payment receipts as well as Statement of Account issued by the OP Developer. Some of the Complainants have obtained Housing Loan from several financial institutions in order to make the timely payment to the OP Developer. It was also stated that in some cases, even the late payment charges @18% p.a. were also deposited alongwith demanded amount in case of late payment. The details of the Complainants, Unit Allotted, Amount deposited and expected date of delivery of the Units, is reproduced in the following table:- <FRM>JUDGEMENT_62_LAWS(NCD)3_2022_1.html</FRM>