BHOPAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY BHOPAL Vs. CHANDRA PRAKAS CHOUKSE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal under Sec. 51 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (in short, the 'Act') is directed against the order dtd. 11/11/2022 of the Madhya Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Bhopal in Complaint no. 61 of 2018 allowing the complaint alleging deficiency in service in delay in delivery of possession of flat and directing the opposite party (appellant herein) to repay the complainant (respondent herein) Rs.23,30,128.00 in respect of flat booked by him with interest @ 10% from the dates of payment along with compensation of Rs.1,00,000.00 for mental agony within two months failing which with interest @ 10% and costs of Rs.5,000.00.

(2.) We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the records. The delay of 88 days in the filing of the appeal was considered in light of the application seeking condonation of the delay. For the reasons stated therein, the delay was condoned in the interest of justice.

(3.) The relevant facts of the case, in brief, are that the appellant had promoted a scheme of residential flats called Mahalaxmi Residential Campus Scheme, Pul Bogda in Bhopal in which the respondent was allotted a 2 BHK MIG flat (No. 109) based on registration application dtd. 5/9/2013 against payment of Rs.2,86,500.00. The project was planned to be executed on land from the Krishi Upaj Mandi Committee. As per allotment order dtd. 24/2/2014, flat 109 admeasuring 1468.78 sq ft super built area was allotted for which payments was required to be made in 4 instalments of Rs.4,48,824.00 by 26/3/2014, Rs.8,14,268.00 by 26/9/2014, Rs.7,80,536.00 by 26/3/2015 and Rs.3,05,711.00 with interest @ 9% in case delivery period was extended beyond 3 years. The first 3 instalments including interest totalling to Rs.23,30,128.00 were paid by the respondent on 20/5/2014 and 2/5/2015. Prior to the due date for the 4th instalment (26/2/2017), appellant informed allottees including the respondent vide letter dtd. 23/1/2017 that the 4th instalment need not be paid till further notice in view of legal issues with regard to the land raised by the Auokaf-a-Amma before the MP State Waqf Tribunal. Alleging deficiency in service due to delay in handing over possession as the project was not complete, respondent approached the State Commission seeking refund and compensation which Complaint was allowed on contest and is now impugned before us.