ASHOK MITTAL Vs. ARDEE INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Vaibhav Gaggar, Advocate, for the complainants and Mr. Sukumar Pattjoshi, Senior Advocate, assisted by Mr. Bimlendu Shekhar, Advocate, for the opposite party.

(2.) Initially 59 (at present 180) set of the allottees of the flat in project 'Palm Grove Heights' have filed above complaint for directing the opposite party to (i) pay delay compensation in the form of interest @ 21% p.a. or any other rate, deemed appropriate by this Commission, on the deposit of the allottees, from due date of possession till the date of handing over possession; (ii) refund the cost of parking with interest @ 21% p.a. from the date of realization till the date of refund; (iii) refund Rs.85875.00 with interest @ 21% p.a. from the date of realization till the date of refund, realized as club membership charge and provide a community centre; (iv) award compensation for reducing the lifts from four lifts as promised to two lifts as installed or in alternative the opposite party be directed to provide four lifts; (v) provide appropriate number parking slots for the visitors; (vi) refund enhanced stamp duty, service tax, VAT, enhanced cost for increased area, replacement fund and interest free security deposit with interest @ 21% p.a. from the date of realization till the date of refund; (vii) pay compensation for harassment and mental agony; and (viii) any other order which is deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstance of the case. The complainants filed IA/14068/2017 under Sec. 12(1)(c) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, for permission to file joint complaint in representative capacity, which was allowed on 9/5/2018. In amended memo of the parties filed on 25/3/2022, 184 sets of allottee are shown as the complainants. Later on an affidavit was filed on 19/10/2023, in which, it has been stated that complainants-3, 6, 12 and 14 have no common interest and 180 sets allottee have common interest.

(3.) The complainants stated that the opposite party was a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, having its registered office at 28, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi-110001. The opposite party launched a group housing project of 'three bed-room deluxe apartment', in the name of 'Palm Grove Heights', Ardee City, at villages Wazirabad and Bindapur, Sector-52, Gurgaon and made its wide publicity in the year 2004. Believing upon the representations of the opposite party, the complainants and other allottees booked the apartments in the said project, starting from the year 2004 onward. Possession of the apartments was to be delivered within 30 months from the date of commencement of construction i.e. by January, 2009 as the construction was started on 20/7/2006. However, in spite of timely payment of the instalments, the opposite party failed to deliver the possession in time. On the contrary, the opposite party arbitrarily imposed additional cost for increased area, club charges, replacement fund, electricity charges and interest free security deposit, car parking etc. Due to delay in handing over possession, stamp duty, service tax, VAT etc. have been enhanced. The opposite party has reduced the numbers of lifts from four to two. Numerous flat allottees are aggrieved by above arbitrary acts of the opposite party and there is sameness of the interest of all such allottees. For the purposes of appreciating controversy, the facts of Ashok Mittal and Veena Mittal (complainants-1-a and 1-b) were given as follows:-