JITENDER KUMAR Vs. ANSAL HOUSING

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Amarjeet Singh, Advocate, for the complainants and Ms. Anubha Pruja, Authorised Representative, for the opposite party.

(2.) Jitender Kumar and Mrs. Sumitra, the complainants have filed above complaint for directing the opposite party to (i) refund entire amount of Rs.5416029.00 with interest @18% per annum from the dates of respective deposit till the date of refund, (ii) pay Rs.500000.00, as compensation for mental agony and harassment, (iii) pay Rs.100000.00, as litigation cost, (iv) to award compensation for unfair trade practice under Sec. 14(h)(b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and (v) any other relief which is deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.

(3.) The complainants stated that Ansal Housing and Construction 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 "Ansal Heights, 86", Sector-86, Gurgaon, Haryana in the year 2011 and made wide publicity of its facilities and amenities. Believing upon the representations of the opposite party, the complainants booked a flat on 30/11/2011 and deposited the booking amount of Rs.600000..00 The opposite party allotted Unit No.40103, saleable area 1360 sq.ft. for basic sale price of Rs.4645200.00 and executed a Flat Buyer's Agreement in favour of the complainants on 26/12/2012. Annexure-A of the agreement provides payment plan as "construction link payment plan". As per demand of opposite party, the complainants deposited total amount of Rs.5416029.00 till January, 2016. Clause 31 of the agreement provides 42 months period for offer of possession from the date of execution of agreement with grace period of six months. The agreement was executed on 26/12/2012. Forty two months period expired on 25/6/2016 and grace period of six months period expired on 25/12/2016. The opposite party has neither completed the construction nor offered possession of the flat allotted to the complainants although the complainants have paid more than basic sale price. In December, 2017, the complainants visited the office of opposite party and requested to refund their money as the construction was not proceeding, but the opposite party did not give any heed to the request of the complainants. In February, 2018, the complainants again asked the opposite party to refund their money. But their request was not accepted by the opposite party. Then this complaint was filed on 4/4/2018.