CHANDRAVADAN VITHALDAS GANATRA Vs. JAIPRAKASH ASSOCIATES LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Amit Singh Chauhan, Advocate, for the complainants and Mr. Sukumar Pattjoshi, Sr. Advocate, assisted by Mr. Daksh Pandit, Advocate, for the opposite party.

(2.) Chandravadan Vithaldas Ganatra and Rajni Ganatra have filed above complaint, for directing the opposite party to (i) refund Rs.9393812.70 with interest @18% per annum from the date of respective deposit till the date of refund; (ii) pay Rs.2000000.00 as compensation for mental agony and harassment; (iii) award traveling and other correspondence expenses incurred by the complainants; (iv) pay Rs.250000.00 as costs of litigation; and (v) any other relief which is deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.

(3.) The complainants stated that Jaiprakash Associates Limited (the opposite party) was a company, registered under the Companies Act, 1956 and engaged in the business of development and construction of group housing project. The opposite party launched a group housing project in the name of "Pavilion Court" at Jaypee Green, Wish Town, Noida in the year, 2008 and made wide publicity of its amenities and facilities. The complainants held a meeting with Vice-President, Marketing and other officials, in May, 2008, in which, they confirmed the advertisements and assured that possession would be handed over within 36 months of the booking. Believing upon the representations of the opposite party, the complainants booked a flat on 10/5/2008 and deposited booking amount of Rs.8.00 lacs. The opposite party issued Provisional Allotment Letter dtd. 14/7/2008, allotting Unit Reference No. P14-102, super area 1600 sq.ft. for a consideration of Rs.7844000.00. In the provisional allotment letter also the opposite party has mentioned that possession would be handed over within 36 months. By an Amendment To Provisional Allotment Letter dtd. 5/9/2008, the opposite party provided payment plan. The complainants opted for "construction link payment plan". As per demand, the complainants deposited Rs.712000.00 on 11/8/2008, Rs.696000.00 on 23/10/2008, Rs.696000.00 on 23/1/2009, Rs.689593.00 on 26/9/2009, Rs.1458898.00 on 7/5/2010, Rs.2540400.00 on 2/8/2012, Rs.132857.00 on 1/11/2012, Rs.4942.00 on 4/4/2013, Rs.724105.00 on 22/8/2013 and Rs.223748.00 on 30/10/2013. The representative of the complainants visited the site in the year 2011-2012 and found that the construction was yet to commence although due date of possession expired on 13/7/2011. In the year 2013, the opposite party informed that super area has been increased. The opposite party raised a demand of Rs.712171.00 in the head of interest, in February, 2015 and gave threatening that in case, it is not deposited then allotment would be cancelled, which was deposited by the complainants on 18/2/2015. Without completing the construction, the opposite party issued letter dtd. 31/1/2017, offering possession. The representative of the complainants visited the spot and found that construction was going on and the flat was not in habitable condition. On persistent effort, the opposite party permitted the complainants to inspect the flat in July, 2018 then they found that their flat was not located Golf Course facing, carpet area has been reduced and the flat was still unfurnished. The complainants lodged their grievances. The representative of the complainants again visited the flat in April, 2019 and found that it was still unfurnished. The complainants also came to know that the opposite party did not have requisite sanction from various statutory authorities. Then this complaint was filed on 30/8/2019, alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice.