DLF HOMES PANCHKULA PVT. LTD. Vs. SATISH GOYAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal under Sec. 19 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (in short, 'the Act') challenges the order dtd. 18/1/2021 of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chandigarh in Consumer Complaint No.22 of 2020 filed by the complainants and directing the refund of Rs.9,75,285.00 paid by them with interest @ 12% per annum from the respective dates of deposits, within 30 days, failing which to refund, with penal interest of 3% (i.e. 15%), from the date of the order till realization along with compensation for harassment and litigation cost of Rs.50,000.00.

(2.) The brief facts of the case are that the appellant launched a project 'The Valley' at Sector-3, Pinjore-Kalka Urban Complex, Panchkula, Haryana in which the complainants booked an independent floor on 12/3/2012 and were allotted floor No.DVF-F4/4-FF for a sale consideration of Rs.6,570,155.04. Payments were to be made as per 2 year Construction Linked Payment Plan under clause 11 (A) of the Allotment Letter the project was to be completed within 24 months, subject to force majeure conditions. The appellant paid a sum of Rs.9,75,285.00 in two installments and did not make any further payments. Accordingly, the allotment was cancelled on 9/5/2014 by the appellant after several notices for making the necessary payments.

(3.) The appellant submits that the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Tara Chand and Ors. Vs. M/s. DLF Homes Panchkula (P) Ltd. and Ors. in W.P. No.6230/2010 vide order dtd. 6/4/2010 had restrained the appellants from creating any third party rights and to ensure that there was no change in the nature of the land or any further construction activity. Since this order covered the unit in question and project land, the appellants were unable to proceed with the project. This order was stayed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP (Civil Appeal) No.10663 of 2010 dtd. 23/7/2010. However, another SLP No.21786-88 of 2010 was filed before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Ravindra Singh Vs. State of Haryana and Ors., which stayed the construction activities at the project site, vide its order dtd. 19/4/2012. Therefore, the appellant contends that it was unable to proceed with the project. It is submitted that vide its order dtd. 12/12/2012, the Hon'ble Supreme Court vacated its order in the said SLP whereafter the appellants resumed the project and obtained revised approvals from the concerned authority on 6/9/2013 and 14/8/2014.