SANGEETA ARORA Vs. DLF UNIVERSAL LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ON 14.2.1994, Mrs. Sangita Arora, the complainant, in this case booked an apartment measuring super area 91.03 sq. mt. with the opposite party, DLF Universal Limited. The opposite party formally allotted an apartment No. B -061 in Regency Park, DLF City, Gurgaon to the petitioner. Agreement between the parties was entered into on 23.5.1994. It was agreed that price of the flat would be Rs.7,59,372/ -. The complainant paid a sum of Rs.89,607/ - to the opposite party as an earnest money. It was stipulated in the agreement that the possession of the apartment would be delivered to the complainant within three and a half years from the date of booking i.e. 14.2.1994, according to the complainant. The opposite party failed to deliver the possession of the apartment to the complainant upto 29.8.1997 without assigning any reason. Moreover, the opposite party increased the area and demanded extra money from the complainant. The grievance of the complainant is that she was not informed about the said fact and no consent was obtained from the complainant in this regard. Till then the complainant had paid an amount of Rs.8,01,131.32 paise so far.

(2.) ON 2.6.2000, the opposite party acting unilaterally and arbitrarily cancelled the allotment and also sent a cheque for a sum of Rs.6,16,638/ - towards the refund due to the complainant. However, the complainant did not encash that amount. Thereafter, the opposite party offered restoration of the flat but demanded undue and arbitrary amounts from the complainant. The complainant requested the opposite party to charge just and reasonable amount but the opposite party sent a letter dated 18.02.2003 to the complainant demanding an amount of Rs.11,15,330/ - as pre condition for restoration of the allotment of the apartment. The complainant filed a complaint before the District Forum and made the following prayers.

(3.) THE defence set up by the respondent is this. It was admitted that the petitioner had submitted an application for allotment on 14.2.1994. The complainant had opted for 10 years payment plans in respect of apartment in question. The complainant failed to pay overdue instalments despite receipt of letter dated 30.12.1997. Under the circumstances, the opposite party was compelled to terminate the agreement dated 23.3.1994. Again, vide letter dated 10.9.1998, the complainant was called upon to clear the outstanding payment and to complete the requisite paper work so that the possession of the apartment could be given to the petitioner. Thereafter, several opportunities were granted to the complainant to pay the amount but the complainant did not do the needful. The complainant sent a letter dated 24.8.2001 to the opposite party requesting it to waive the interest which the opposite party did not agree. It is explained that allotment of the apartment in favour of complainant, in view of the circumstances, was validly and legally terminated. It is contended that there was no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.