MADHU MEHANI & ANR ; ABHINAV MEHANI Vs. UNITECH HI-TECH DEVELOPERS LTD & 7 ORS ; SIDHARTHA SHANKAR BHOWMICK, DIRECTOR; SANJAY KUMAR SINGH DIRECTOR; RANA RAJESH KUMAR GANGAHAR; JYOTI KANOJYA; BALDEV GUPTA; RAMESH CHANDRA; ICICI BANK LTD THROUGH HEAD MANAGER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The complainants, who are mother and son, booked a residential flat with the opposite party in a project viz., "The Burgundy, which the opposite party Unitech Hi-tech Developers Ltd. was to develop in Sector- 96 to 98, Noida. Vide allotment letter dated 14.10.2010, apartment no. 0401 in tower 1 of the aforesaid project was allotted to the complainants for a total sale consideration of Rs. 3,83,52,156/-. As per the terms and conditions of the allotment, the possession of the flat was to be delivered within 36 months of the date on which the terms and conditions came to be executed. Since the said terms and conditions were executed on 14.10.2010, the possession ought to have been delivered by 14.10.2013. The grievance of the complainants is that despite they having paid Rs. 3,49,37,785/-, to the opposite party, the possession has not been offered to them. The complainants are, therefore, before this Commission, seeking refund of the amount paid by them to the opposite party alongwith compensation etc.

(2.) The complaint has been resisted by the opposite party on the same ground which this Commission has already rejected in C.C. No. 606 of 2017 - Sanjeev Malhotra Vs. Unitech Hi-Tech Developers Limited decided on 11.10.2017 relying upon its earlier decision in Consumer Complaint No.307 of 2015 Mr. Pramod Yadav Vs. Unitech Hi-Tech Developers Limited decided on 06.01.2017.

(3.) The learned counsel for the complainants on instructions states that in order to avoid further litigation, the complainants are agreeable to accept compensation in the form of interest @ 10% per annum.