PARVEEN LATA JAIN Vs. DLF UNIVERSAL LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard counsel for the parties.

(2.) Above complaint has been filed for directing the opposite party to (a) hand over the vacant and peaceful possession of the flat bearing No.CGV-203, DLF Capital Greens Phase-II, Shivaji Marg, Najafgarh Road, New Delhi-110015 to the complainant after executing the relevant sale deed; (b) pay to the complainant compensation of Rs.4154439.00 due to delay of 24 months by the opposite party in completing the construction of the flat of the complainant despite receiving entire consideration amount; (c) pay to the complainant the compensation on account of rentals for the delayed period; (d) pay Rs.10.00 lacs on account of mental agony and harassment; (e) pay Rs.1.00 lac as litigation cost; and (f) any other appropriate relief which this Hon'ble Forum may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case.

(3.) The complainant stated that 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 project of group housing in the name of "DLF Capital Greens' Phase-ll", at Shivaji Marg, Najafgarh Road, New Delhi. On coming to know about the said project, the complainant booked a flat on 26/9/2009 and deposited application money. The opposite party allotted Apartment No.CGV-213 on 29/9/2009 and executed Apartment Buyers Agreement on 16/6/2010 in respect of Apartment no.CGV-213 having super area of 1520 sq. ft. for basic sale price of Rs.7500.00 per sq. ft. Payment Plan was "construction link payment plan". Clause 11(a) of the Agreement, provides that construction had to be completed within 36 months from the date of the application. Clause-14 of the agreement provides that if the builder is not able to give possession within the aforesaid period, then the buyer would be entitled for compensation at the rate of Rs.10.00 per sq.ft. per month on super area. The opposite party vide letter dtd. 10/3/2010, informed that construction had commenced. The complainant diligently followed payment plan and deposited Rs.10968219.00 till 18/10/2010. The complainant also paid Rs.3809.00 for one extra car parking space and Rs.435944.00 for shifting car parking from 3rd basement to 2nd basement. The opposite party, vide letter dtd. 19/7/2012, unilaterally revised the completion schedule from 36 months to 52 months. The opposite party gave a revised payment plan on 10/12/2010, in which, the opposite party informed that construction would be completed within 52 months. The opposite party sought for confirmation of new schedule. The complainant raised protest for revised schedule, vide letter dtd. 17/8/2012. The opposite party offered early payment rebate to the complainant @12.5% per annum calculated on the basis of the number of days by which remittance has been paid in advance, vide letter dtd. 27/8/2012. The opposite party, vide letter dtd. 28/2/2013, informed that super area has been increased to 1591.91 sq.ft from 1520 sq.ft. and demanded Rs.599717.00 towards increased super area. The opposite party issued another demand letter dtd. 14/3/2013 and reminder dtd. 9/4/2013, for Rs.414926.00. The complainant, vide letter dtd. 20/3/2013, requested to adjust these demands from early payment rebate (along with calculation sheet), as provided vide letter dtd. 27/8/2012. The opposite party referred the issue of "early payment rebate" to an Arbitrator Mr. P.K. Sharma, Advocate, who issued notice to the complainant, for hearing, fixing 20/4/2013. The complainant vide letter dtd. 17/4/2013, informed that she did not accept reference and appointment of arbitrator. The opposite party issued Reminder-I dtd. 9/4/2013, Reminder-II dtd. 16/4/2013 and final notice dtd. 3/5/2013. This complaint was filed in January, 2019, after dismissal of CC/321/2013, by State Commission, on the ground of pecuniary jurisdiction.