AMBILY MENON Vs. BPTP LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Aditya Parolia, Advocate, for the complainants and Mr. Pragyan Pradip Sharma, Advocate, for the opposite parties.

(2.) Ambily Menon and Mohan Veluthedathu Balan have filed above complaint, for directing the opposite parties to (i) refund Rs.3468000.00 with interest @18% per annum, from the date of respective deposit till the date of refund; (ii) pay Pre-EMI to HDFC Bank on the loan of the complainant as per subvention scheme; (iii) pay Rs.500000.00, as compensation for mental agony and harassment; (iv) pay Rs.100000.00, as litigation costs; and (v) any other relief which is deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.

(3.) The complainants stated that M/s. BPTP Limited and Countywide Promoters Private Limited (opposite parties-1 and 2) were companies, registered under the Companies Act, 1956 and engaged in the business of development and construction of group housing project. The opposite parties launched a group housing project, in the name of 'Pedestal' at village Palra, Sector-70 and 70-A, Gurgaon, in the year, 2013 and made wide publicity of its amenities and facilities. Believing upon the representations of the opposite parties, the complainants booked a flat and deposited booking amount of Rs.900000.00 on 24/7/2013. The opposite parties issued Allotment Letter dtd. 7/2/2014, allotting Unit No.B-107-SF, built-up area 1070 sq.ft., total cost of Rs.9432988.91 and executed Floor Buyer's Agreement on 17/12/2013, in favour of the complainants. Annexure to the allotment letter contained payment plan as 'construction link payment plan'. Clause-5.1 (read with clauses-1.4 and 1.15) of the agreement provides 36 months period from the date of execution of the agreement with grace period of 180 days for delivery of possession. In order to make timely payment of the instalments, the complainants took a loan of Rs.6772116.00 from HDFC Bank, for which, a Tripartite Agreement was executed on 21/4/2014. Under subvention scheme, the opposite parties undertook to pay Pre-EMI till the date of offer of possession. As per demand, the complainants deposited Rs.510500.00 on 18/4/2014, Rs.1810436.00 on 15/5/2014, Rs.237897.00 on 3/12/2014 and Rs.9167.00 on 3/12/2016 (total Rs.3468000.00). The opposite parties undertook to pay Pre-EMI on the loan till offer of possession but they were not paying Pre-EMI and HDFC Bank raised demand of Rs.18248.00 on 10/5/2016 as the interest on Pre-EMI and reminder for two months on 27/6/2016. The complainants wrote for updating construction status. Then the opposite parties gave an email dtd. 19/9/2017 that possession would likely to be delivered till April, 2018. The complainants downloaded photographs of the site from the website of the opposite parties and found that information given through email was incorrect inasmuch as construction of block-B was at preliminary stage. As per agreement, due date of possession expired in June, 2017. The complainants were living in a rented accommodation and HDFC Bank has also started EMI of the loan, as such, the complainants are facing financial problem, due to unreasonable delay in possession. Then this complaint was filed on 29/9/2017, alleging deficiency in service.