VINEET RUIA Vs. GEETA GANESH PROMOTERS PVT. LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Mahesh Tiwari, Advocate, for the complainants and Mr. Partha Sil, Advocate, for the opposite party.

(2.) Vineet Ruia and Smt. Anuradha Ruia have filed above complaint for directing the opposite party to (i) complete registration formality of the property in question, immediately, without any additional cost to be borne by the complainants; (ii) restrain the opposite party from selling Flat No. 11-B, Tower 5, 93, Moulana Abul Kalam Azam Sarani, Kolkata or creating third party interest over it; (iii) pay compensation for delayed possession, in the form of interest on their deposit and further interest on delayed refund of GST input credit amounting Rs.10941693.41 till 30/4/2022 and further interest till the date of its realization; (iv) pay Rs.500000000.00, as compensation for mental agony and harassment; (v) allow the complainants and their family to use all facilities and amenities available in the project 'Rare Eath' without any recourse or demur hereafter; (vi) restrain the opposite party from any construction or repair work in the project 'Rare Earth', including the land measuring 48160.53 sq. metres or any adjoining /abutting land; (vii) restrain the opposite party from selling unsold flats in the project 'Rare Earth', in public interest: (viii) pay Rs.350000.00, as litigation costs; and (iii) any other relief, which is deemed fit and proper in the fact of the case.

(3.) The complainants stated that M/s. Geeta Ganesh Promoters Private Limited 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 'Rare Earth', at Premises No. 93, Moulana Abul Kalam Azad Sarani, Kolkata, in the year 2018 and made wide publicity of its amenities and facilities in print and electronic media. Believing upon the representations of the opposite party, the complainants talked the opposite party for purchasing a flat on 28/2/2020, who informed that Flat 11-B, Tower 5, admeasuring 2062 sq.ft. built-up area, 1845 sq.ft. carpet area (excluding balcony area) + two covered car parking and one open car parking, total price of Rs.27580518.00 in the project 'Rare Earth' was available. The complainants deposited Rs.1100000.00, through cheque dtd. 28/2/2020. The complainants asked for some discount to Mr. Gopal Prasad, Director of the opposite party on 5/3/2020, who did not agree and returned the money of the complainants through RTGS. The complainants were in urgent need of the flat for their aged parents as such they made full payment of Rs.27580518.00 (including Rs.2950608.00 as GST) on 6/3/2020 and signed an agreement for sale without going through it. The opposite party handed over fit-out possession of said Flat 11-B, Tower 5 on 7/3/2020 to the complainants, who after taking possession, started interior decoration work in the said flat. Due to spread of Novel Corona-virus pandemic in the country, the Government imposed lock down from 22/3/2020, as such the documents could not be executed. The opposite party obtained 'completion certificate' on 9/12/2020. As per agreement dtd. 6/3/2020, the opposite party had to handover possession within two months after obtaining 'completion certificate' but they delayed handing over possession and also neglected to refund input credit of GST to the complainants. As the opposite party was delaying delivery of possession on one or other pretext, the complainants through emails dtd. 11/5/2021, 9/7/2021 and 30/7/2021 asked to refund GST input credits, held by them, which ought to have been refunded immediately after 31/3/2020. After few months, the officials of the opposite party handed over agreement for sale dtd. 6/3/2020 as signed by the complainants, then they read it and found significant deviations and discrepancies in it, in comparison with the draft agreement as uploaded on the WBHIRA website. The complainants, through emails dtd. 19/7/2021 and 23/7/2021, requested to rectify the discrepancies in the agreement for sale. The complainants, through emails dtd. 28/7/2021, asked the opposite party to handover possession of the flat as they had made full payment and the opposite party had handed over possession to various other allottees in the project. The opposite party did not respond to any of the emails. The complainants filed a complaint before WBRERA on 1/8/2021 and copy of the said complaint was served upon the opposite party through email on 2/8/2021. The complainants through email dtd. 26/8/2021, raised queries in respect of calculation of the built up area and carpet area, privacy and safety of the flat. State Government reduced prevailing circle rate by 10% and also offered rebate of 2% in stamp duty on the registration of sale deed up to 31/10/2021. The complainants wrote an email dtd. 26/9/2021 to execute sale deed and handover possession so that they could get benefit of above rebate/reduction but the opposite party did not respond. The complainants gave legal notice dtd. 28/9/2021, calling upon the opposite party to handover possession forthwith and execute sale deed. The opposite party gave reply dtd. 28/9/2021, replying that registration of the sale deed and refund of GST input credit would be done before 31/10/2021 and stated that as possession had already been handed over, the complainants would be liable for holding charges. The complainants replied that letter on 28/9/2021 and stated that only fit-out possession, restricting entry between 8:00 am to 6:00 pm was handed over and in spite of repeated requests, final possession was not handed over as such they would not be liable to pay holding charges. The complainants showed their willingness to execute sale deed on 29/9/2021. The opposite party, through email dtd. 30/9/2021, asked to clear balance dues, pay stamp duty and registration charges and take possession within 7 days. The complainants replied on 30/9/2021 that full consideration had already been paid and the complainants were entitled for refund of GST input credits and delay compensation as such stamp duty and registration charges be arranged, adjusting from the amount payable to them and execute the sale deed before 15/10/2021. The complainants gave an email dtd. 4/10/2021, repeating same request and pointing out discrepancies in the draft of sale deed as uploaded on WBHIRA, also requested to supply a draft copy of the sale deed and with demarcation of car parking spaces. The opposite party, vide letter dtd. 4/10/2021 again repeated demand of stamp duty and registration charges and called to visit its office to verify car parking locations. The complainants again wrote email dtd. 6/10/2021, for adjusting stamp duty and registration charges from GST input credits and delay compensation payable to them and share draft sale deed. The opposite party shared draft sale deed and the valuation and demanded stamp duty and registration charges. The complainants, through email dtd. 8/10/2021 demanded Plan A, B and C as referred in draft sale deed. Plan A, B and C were shared through email dtd. 8/10/2021 and the complainants were asked to visit the site at 4:00 pm for marking of car parking spaces. The complainants shared bank details for refund of GST input credit as demanded by the opposite party through email dtd. 11/10/2021. Various clauses of draft sale deed were not consistent with WBRERA Rules, therefore, the complainants through email dtd. 20/10/2021, requested to make necessary changes in it and informed that they had made payment of stamp duty and registration charges, enclosing e-challan payment confirmation. The opposite party again vide email dtd. 20/10/2021 asked for the bank details for refund of GST input credit. The opposite party in the papers submitted for registration of the project and sanction of layout plan to WBHIRA had shown total area of the land as 48160 sq.mtrs. while in the draft sale deed total area of developed land was shown as 21853.42 sq.mtrs. The complainants vide email dtd. 22/10/2021 sought for a clarification in this respect and also calculation of FAR ratio. The opposite party, vide email dtd. 26/10/2021, informed that registration of the sale deed would be carried out on 28/10/2021 at its office. The complainants raised query in respect of change of clauses as suggested by them through email dtd. 27/10/2021 and requested to share copy of final sale deed. The complainants lodged a complaint with Hon'ble Finance Minister, Special Secretary, GST Council and the Secretary National Anti-Profiteering Authority, Government of India vide email dtd. 27/10/2021 for not refunding GST input credit. The opposite party did not respond to email dtd. 22/10/2021. The complainants lodged a complaint to Director General (Buildings) and Executive Engineer (Buildings) vide email dtd. 27/10/2021 to confirm sanction FAR and consumed FAR in the project. Minimum distance between two towers had been left about 14 inches, ignoring norms of fire safety. The complainants therefore lodged a complaint before Director General, Fire and Emergency Services, West Bengal and Director General (Building) Kolkata Municipal Corporation through email dtd. 11/11/2021. The opposite party, vide email dtd. 17/11/2021 called the complainant to attend their office on 18/11/2021 for registration of the sale deed. The complainants, vide email dtd. 17/11/2021 sought for confirmation as to whether the changes in the sale deed as suggested by them had been incorporated or not. The complainants sought for information in respect of minimum distance between two towers of the building having height of more than 100 metres under Right to Information Act, 2005, from Public Information Officer, Fire and Emergency Services, West Bengal. The complainants vide email dtd. 25/11/2021, against requested for registration of the sale deed and handing over possession and vide email dtd. 4/12/2021, informed that they were ready to sign the sale deed as it was shared by the opposite party and requested to demarcate parking spaces in the map and share it. The opposite party called the complainants for registration of the sale deed on 8/12/2021 in its office. The complainants, vide email dtd. 6/12/2021, again demanded map relating to allocation of their parking spaces. On 7/12/2021, the opposite party informed that they could not arrange for registration of sale deed in its office on 8/12/2021. The complainants found that there were multiple contradictions between the drafts of the agreement and sale deed and final agreement and sale deed. The complainants, vide email dtd. 8/12/2021, informed the opposite party that they were signing the sale deed not of their free will. As the map relating to demarcation of parking spaces was received, the complainants, vide email dtd. 9/12/2021, asked for some other date for registration of the sale deed. The opposite party shared the map relating to demarcation of parking spaces on 11/12/2021. The opposite party, vide letter dtd. 16/12/2021 terminated the agreement and informed the complainants to take refund of their amount. The complainants, vide letter dtd. 17/12/2021, protested the termination of the agreement. Then this complaint was filed on 9/6/2022.