DLF HOMES PANCHKULA PVT. LTD Vs. PARVEEN KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal has been filed by the appellant/opposite party against the Order dtd. 14/3/2019 of the State Commission whereby the complaint no. 807 of 2017 was allowed.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that the complainant / respondent booked a flat in the project of appellant Company in "The DLF Valley" situated in Sector-3, Kalka Pinjore Urban Complex, Panchkula on 28/2/2010. The complainant was allotted unit no. E-2/19, first floor of 1751 sq. ft vide allotment letter dtd. 10/3/2010. The Independent Floor buyer's agreement was also executed on 10/1/2011 in his favour. The total sale consideration of unit was Rs.37,69,599.00. As per clause 11 (a) of the agreement, the appellant promised to deliver possession within 24 months from the date of execution of the agreement. The respondent, was, however, offered possession of the said unit on 3/2/2016. The appellant vide possession letter dtd. 3/2/2016 asked the respondent to deposit Rs.14,12,609.00 which the complainant deposited and took possession of the unit. The sale deed was also executed on 6/6/2016. Thereafter, complainant wrote an email to the appellant followed by a letter for delay compensation but all in vain. Respondent being aggrieved by the said act of the appellant filed a complaint before state commission seeking direction to appellant to pay interest at 15% p.a for delay in handing over of possession till the date of delivery of possession and compensation of Rs.2,00,000.00 for mental agony and Rs.35,000.00 as cost of litigation.

(3.) The opposite party had filed its objections in its written statement before the State Commission wherein it is stated that offer of possession was offered to complainant on 3/2/2016 after receiving Occupancy certificate on 10/7/2015. It is also contended that immediately on payment of dues, sale deed was executed on 6/6/2016. It is further contended that respondent has filed complaint in total disregard to the independent floor buyer agreement. It was further contended that the project was escalation free and complainant was getting benefit of said escalation on account of construction material/ labour cost and price appreciation. It is also contended that delay was caused due to stay on construction ordered by the Punjab and Haryana High Court and thereafter by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the year 2010 and 2012. Therefore, complainant vide letter dt. 1/2/2013 was offered an exit option. By said exit option respondent was given an opportunity to seek refund along with 9 % interest but respondent refused to avail the said option and thus opted to continue with the project along with extension of time for further period of 12 months. Therefore, having already known of the fact about delay, respondent cannot claim compensation on account of delay by the appellant.