OMAXE LIMITED Vs. VINAY DUA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present First Appeal has been filed under Sec. 19 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') against the Order dtd. 19/8/2016 passed by the learned Punjab State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chandigarh (hereinafter referred as 'the State Commission'), in Consumer Complaint No.82 of 2014 whereby the State Commission directed OP-1 and 2 to refund the deposited with interest @18% p.a. from the date respective deposits to the Complainant. The OP-3 also directed to pay Rs.35,000.00 as compensation for deficiency in service to the Complainant.

(2.) For convenience, the parties in present matter are hereinafter referred to as per position held in the Consumer Complaint.

(3.) Brief facts of the case are that the the complainants booked a residential Flat No. 702 in Tower No. 5 at Omaxe Royal Residency, Ludhiana for a sale consideration of Rs.49,35,500.00 in July 2008. They paid Rs.4,95,000.00 at the time of booking, and the flat was to be delivered fully furnished within 30 months from the agreement date. Omaxe Ltd. (OP-1 and 2), also facilitated a loan for the complainants from Bank of India (OP-3), which disbursed Rs.20,00,000.00 towards the flat's payment. Despite having paid over 50% of the flat's price, the construction of Tower No. 5 never commenced. The complainants were subsequently informed that they had been allotted flat No. 702 in Tower No. 1, which was done without their consent and in violation of the agreement. When they visited the site in 2011, they found that construction of Tower No. 1 was also stalled. As a result, they requested either a refund or possession of a completed flat in an alternate building. In April 2012, Bank of India served them a notice requesting Title Deed or threatening to recall the loan with penal interest, even though they had been regularly paying the EMIs. When the complainants sought clarification from the OPs regarding flat possession, they asked the balance amount to be paid by November 30, 2012, and in return, Rs.8,10,948.00 in interest would be waived. The complainants asked the bank to disburse the balance amount, but the bank declined due to project delays. After further failed attempts to get a commitment from Omaxe regarding possession, the OP-1 and 2 issued a cancellation notice on March 11, 2014, demanding Rs.18,98,170.00 plus Rs.27,97,943.00 in interest within 10 days, or the allotment would be cancelled and amounts forfeited. The complainants served a legal notice in April 2014 demanding possession or a refund. The OP-1 and 2 failed to respond, leading the complainants to file the present case, alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practices on the part of Omaxe Ltd seeking the following reliefs: