VISHAL SODHI Vs. ANSAL HI TECH TOWNSHIP LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present complaint is a joint complaint on behalf of allottees/ buyers of built up units in the Hi-tech green township called 'Megapolis Green Hi Tech Township ' launched by the Opposite Party in Bulandshahar, adjoining Greater Noida, UP in 2007. The Complainants are a group of buyers of built up residential units in a project promoted by the Opposite Party which was launched in 2007 Possession of the flats has not been offered by the Opposite Party to the Complainants so far even after 10 years of the booking date. The Complainants have paid varying amounts to the Opposite Party in respect of the flats booked and have a common grievance of getting a full refund of this money along with compensation. For the sake of convenience, the facts of the case of Complainant No 1 are being considered as representative of the other complainants.

(2.) The facts of the case are that in response to the promotional efforts of the Opposite Party/Builder, the complainants applied for allotment of residential flats in the project 'Megapolis Green Hi Tech Township ' in Bulandshahar, adjoining Greater Noida, UP in 2007. Following the acceptance of application/booking forms for flats on various dates from the complainants, the OP entered into a Builder Buyer 's Agreement with them after a period of 2 months to one year with the respective complainants. As per clause 4.1 of this Agreement, possession of the built-up units was to be handed over within 42 months of the signing of the agreement. However, despite a lapse of 10 years of booking of the flats, this has not happened. According to the complainants, this is due to the wilful delay of the OP. Despite several attempts by the buyers requesting to expedite the project, and despite the OP 's letter dtd. 22/7/2011 clarifying that the project was not covered by orders of the Hon 'ble Allahabad High Court and the Hon 'ble Supreme Court relating to compulsory acquisition of land resulting in farmers agitations. On 26/4/2016, the OP had conveyed through a letter its inability to give possession due to unforeseen circumstances, agitations/ hindrances by locals/ farmers and instead offered alternate units in other locations.

(3.) On grounds of unfair trade practices and deficiency in service, the complainants are before this Commission with the following prayer: