MANJIT SINGH Vs. EMAAR MGF LAND LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present Complaint under Sec. 21 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short "the Act") has been filed by the Complainants.

(2.) The admitted facts of the case are that the Complainant had booked a flat with the Opposite Party in February 2011. The Complainant was allotted a unit No.PGN-04-1404 in the project Palm Garden, Sector 83, Gurgaon vide allotment letter dtd. 28/2/2011. The Builder Buyers Agreement was executed on 25/6/2011. The total cost of the flat was 94,46,816/-. As per the agreement, possession of the flat was to be handed over within 36 months + 3 months from the date of start of construction. The scheduled date of start of the construction was August 2012 and accordingly, the possession was to be handed over by November 2015. It is the admitted fact that the possession could not be offered by the Opposite Party within the admitted scheduled period. During this period, the Complainant had deposited a sum of 89,06,835/- on various dates. The Complaint has been filed by the Complainant alleging deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party in offering the possession of the subject property within the scheduled period; claiming refund of the amount deposited along with interest @ 18% p.a.; seeking refund of sum of 56,298/- which was allegedly deducted as delayed payment charges. The Complainant also claimed 15 Lakhs towards mental agony, harassment etc. and 2 Lakhs towards litigation expenses.

(3.) The Complaint is contested by the Opposite Party on the ground that although the offer of possession was not made within the scheduled period but it was offered on 22/3/2018, i.e., one year prior to the date of filing of the Complaint; that the delay of 27 months over the scheduled period is not considerable and can be condoned.