DOLLY GULERIA Vs. ANSAL HOUSING & CONSTRUCTION LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The complainant/appellant booked a residential flat with the respondent in the project namely "Woodbury Apartments" which the respondent was to develop in Zirakpur, Punjab. The complainant made a total payment of Rs.8,37,500/- to the respondent by 30.10.2010. An allotment letter dated 10.11.2010 was admittedly got signed from the Complainant, though her case is that the said letter was not delivered to her. Vide Email dated 24.6.2011, the respondent, presumably on the request of the complainant, asked them to put an application to change the payment plan and receive allotment letter of the flats. Vide Email dated 29.6.2011, the complainant requested the respondent to change the plan from lump sum payment to construction linked payment plan and incorporate a firm date of completion / possession in the allotment letter / agreement. It was further requested that if a firm date cannot be given, the complainant would like to withdraw their request for allotment and seek refund the advance paid by them with interest. Vide letter dated 06.3.2012, the respondent cancelled the allotment made to the complainant on the ground that they had not cleared the outstanding dues of Rs.13,69,551.90 and interest on that amount, despite call, notices and reminders. Responding to the aforesaid letter, the complaint stated that the allotment letter, agreements etc., were got signed from them in blank form and no call, notices and reminders had been received by them. They therefore, requested the respondent either to accept payment of balance amount of Rs.13.00 lacs without any interest and remaining 5% amount on receipt of possession letter with a firm date of completion and possession of the flat, or to refund the amount paid by them with interest till the date of refund. Subsequently, vide letter dated 22.9.2015, the respondent sent a refund cheque of Rs.4,37,500/- to the complainant but the said cheque was not encashed by them. The complainant rather approached the concerned State Commission by way of a consumer complaint, seeking refund of the amount paid by them, along with interest and compensation.

(2.) The complaint was resisted by the respondent which took a preliminary objection that it was barred by limitation. On merits, it was alleged that the complainant had failed to make the balance payment and therefore, the allotment was cancelled and the amount paid by the complainant was refunded after deducting the Earnest Money.

(3.) Vide impugned order dated 14.8.2017, the State Commission directed the respondent to refund the amount of Rs.6,12,500/- to the complainant along with interest @ 12% per annum with effect from 19.4.2012 and cost of litigation quantified at Rs.20,000/-. The respondent was permitted to deduct 10% of the sale consideration towards the Earnest Money. Being aggrieved from the order of the State Commission, the complainants are before this Commission by way of this Appeal.