SHEKHAR SETHU Vs. EMAAR MGF LAND LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Shushil Kaushik, Advocate, for the complainants, Mr. Sunil Mund, Advocate, for opposite parties-1 & 2 and Mr. Pragalbh Bhardwaj, Advocate, for opposite party-3.

(2.) Shekhar Shethu and Smrita Jain have filed above complaint, for directing the opposite parties to (i) handover possession of apartment No. TDP-F-F06-602, complete in all respect as per specification and execute conveyance deed in favour of the complainants; (ii) pay compensation for delayed possession in the form of interest @12% per annum on the deposit of the complainants from due date of possession till handing over possession, (iii) exempt the complainants from paying the escalation in cost including enhanced service tax, (iv) pay Rs.5.00 lacs, as compensation for mental agony and harassment and litigation cost; and (v) any other relief which is deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.

(3.) The complainants stated that the opposite parties were companies, registered under the Companies Act, 1956 and engaged in the business of development and construction of group housing projects and selling its unit to the prospective buyers. Opposite parties-2 and 3 were owners of approximately 31.62 acres land at village Badshahpur, Sector-66, Gurgaon. Opposite parties-2 and 3 through a development agreement dtd. 18/3/2006 authorised M/s. Emaar MGF Land Limited (opposite party-1), (for short the developer) for development and construction of group housing projects and selling its unit to the prospective buyers over the aforesaid land. They obtained licence from Director, Town and Country Planning, Haryana, for development of township on 27/9/2007. The developer launched a group housing project in the name of "The Palm Drive" at village Badshahpur, Sector-66, Gurgaon and made wide publicity of its facilities and amenities in the year 2007. Believing upon the representations and lucrative advertisement of the developer, Aneet Singh Virk and Ms. Anjali Ranger Virk, the predecessor-in-interest of the complainants applied for provisional registration on 27/12/2007 and deposited required amount time to time. The opposite parties allotted Unit No. TPD-F-F06-602, super area 2125 sq.ft. and two car parking space, in the project "The Palm Drive", for total sale price Rs.10949175.00 (at the rate of Rs.4600.00 per sq.ft.) and executed Buyer's Agreement dtd. 12/2/2008 in their favour. The complainants purchased aforesaid Unit from Aneet Singh Virk and Ms. Anjali Ranger Virk, with prior permission of the opposite parties though Agreement For Sale dtd. 10/5/2012, for total sale consideration of Rs.11573459.63, including service tax, out of which Rs.10861100.00 had already been paid to the developer. The developer endorsed the names of the complainants in Buyer's Agreement. Clause-14 of the Buyer's Agreement provides that possession would be offered till December, 2010, with grace period of 90 days. At the time of purchasing the apartment, the time line as provided in the agreement had expired. The complainants inquired from the office of the developer for possession, then they informed that possession would be delivered till January, 2013. After, January, 2013, the complainants visited the site several times but found that the construction was not in progress and seemed to be abandoned. The complainants booked apartment from the opposite party in their project "Premier Terraces", in which, also the opposite parties failed to deliver possession on due date. The opposite parties, after collecting money from the home buyers, were utilising it for their own purpose and did not care for timely completion of the project. The complainants were in acute need of the residence and due to delay in possession, they were facing problem. The developer uploaded construction updates in November, 2017, which showed that the construction was near to completion. The complaint was filed on 19/1/2018, alleging deficiency in service.