ANURAG GUPTA Vs. IREO GRACE REALTECH PVT. LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This complaint is filed u/s 21 (a) (i) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 in respect of the flat booked by the complainant in a project promoted and developed by the opposite parties alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice resulting in delay in handing over possession of the flat and seeking refund of the amount deposited along with penal interest and other compensation.

(2.) The brief facts of the case are that the complainant had booked a flat in the project 'The Corridors ' promoted and developed by the Opposite party viz. Ireo Grace Realtech Pvt. Ltd. located on Golf Course Extension Road, Sector 67 A, Gurgaon, Haryana on 2/3/2013 for his residential purpose and deposited Rs. 17,00,000/- as earnest money with the opposite party. On subsequent dates further instalments were paid. An allotment letter was issued by the opposite party to the complainant on 7/8/2013 allotting flat no. CD-A4-11-1102 in Tower A 4, admeasuring 1726.91 sq ft for a total sale consideration of Rs.1,84,44,568.00. The complainant deposited Rs.1,83,55,760.00 towards this flat by way of twelve instalments between May, 2013 and July, 2018. There was no default in payment according to the complainant. An Apartment Buyer 's Agreement (in short 'the ABA ') was entered into between the complainant and the opposite party on 2/6/2014. As per clause 13.3 of the ABA, the opposite party committed to offer possession of the flat within 42 months with an additional grace period of six months i.e. by 22/1/2017 failing which compensation at the rate of Rs.7.50 per sq foot was promised by the opposite party to the complainant. However, possession of the said flat was not offered by the opposite party till the date of filing of the present complaint. Hence, the complainant has approached this Commission alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice in not adhering to the committed date of handing over possession and imposing entirely one sided conditions in the ABA that are in favour of the opposite party which the complainant as a consumer was unable to contest and was compelled to accept.

(3.) In view of the demise of the original complainant during the pendency of these proceedings, his legal heirs were taken on record and are accordingly reflected in the memo of parties.