RAKESH SINGH Vs. GREAT MOHALI AREA DEVELOPMENT ASUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present First Appeals (FAs) have been filed against the common order dtd. 3/10/2018 of State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Punjab (hereinafter referred to as 'State Commission') in CC No. 55 of 2018. FA No. 246 of 2019 has been filed with a delay of 2 days and FA No. 205 of 2021 has been filed with the delay of 760 days. In FA No. 246 of 2019, no condonation of delay application has been filed. Delay of 2 days is condoned after considering the reasons adduced during the hearing. In FA No. 205 of 2021, an IA No. 2552 of 2021 has been filed for condoning the delay. The delay as reported by the Registry is 760 days while delay mentioned in the said IA is 378 days. FA was filed on 15/3/2021. Period from 15/3/2020 to 14/3/2021 i.e. 364 is excluded being the Covid exempted period. Hence the balance delay, after excluding the statutory permissible period of 30 days comes to 413 days. Interalia, following reasons have been given in the said IA:

(2.) Brief facts of the case as presented by the Complainant and as emerged from the FAs, Order of the State Commission and other case records are that Complainant applied for allotment of residential allotment Type-2 in Purab Premium Apartments at Sector 88, SAS Nagar, Mohali under the general category with the OP. The complainant was declared successful in draw of lots held on 19/3/2012 on the basis of which Letter of Intent (LOI) was issued by the OP to the Complainant. The tentative price of the apartment was mentioned as Rs.55,00,000.00. As per condition 3(II) of the LOI, the possession of the apartment was to be delivered to the allottee after completing the development work at the site within a period of 36 months from the date of issuance of the LOI and in case OP fails to deliver the possession of apartment within the stipulated period, allottee shall have the right to withdraw from the scheme by moving an application to the Estate Officer and in that eventuality, the OP shall refund the entire amount alongwith 8% interest.

(3.) It is further the case of the Complainant that complainant was to deposit instalment of Rs.11,00,000.00 which he could not deposit due to non sanctioning of his loan. Letter for permission to mortgage has been given by the OP to the complainant. He further requested the OP to extend the time to deposit the instalment, which was acceded to by the OP. Against the total consideration, the complainant deposited a sum of Rs.59,75,750.00 with the OP on different dates. Further, the complainant averred that despite making the substantial amount, the OP failed to deliver the possession of the apartment within the stipulated period as per condition no. 3 (II) of terms and conditions of LOI. Complainant requested the OP vide letters dtd. 20/9/2016 and 21/11/2016 to refund the amount deposited by him, on which complainant received a letter dtd. 2/2/2017 from the OP informing him that his refund cannot be allowed as per clause 3 (II) of the LOI and it would be refunded as per Punjab Regional Town Planning and Development Act, 1995. Thereafter, a cheque amounting to Rs.52,52,563.00 was received by the complainant as refund of the amount deposited after deducting 10% of the total sale consideration and no interest was calculated. The said cheque got encashed by complainant under protest. The complainant time and again requested the OP to recalculate the amount but in vain. Despite sending legal notice, the OP did not respond too. Being, aggrieved, the Complainant filed CC before the State Commission and State Commission vide order dtd. 3/10/2018 partly allowed the Complaint directing refund of the amount after deducting 10% of the amount without any deduction on account of service tax. The OP was, however, directed to pay a sum of Rs1,25,612/- with interest @ 8% w.e.f. 12/9/2017 till realization. Being aggrieved of the said order, both the Complainant and OP are before this Commission now in the present FAs.