LAWS(NCD)-2019-4-31

DLF HOMES PANCHKULA PVT LTD ; DLF GATEWAY TOWER SECOND FLOOR DLF CITY Vs. RAJIV TANWAR S/O LATE RAJ KUMAR

Decided On April 04, 2019
Dlf Homes Panchkula Pvt Ltd ; Dlf Gateway Tower Second Floor Dlf City Appellant
V/S
Rajiv Tanwar S/O Late Raj Kumar Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal has been filed against the order of the State Commission dated 16.02.2018 in Complaint No. 530 of 2017.

(2.) The admitted facts of the case are that the Appellant had developed a Residential Group Housing Project called "The Valley" situated in Sector-3, Kalka-Pinjore Urban Complex and a flat in that project was booked by the Respondents and they paid the booking amounts as well. An Independent Floor Buyers Agreement was also entered into between the parties and allotment was done in favour of the Respondents. Admittedly, the flat could not be handed over within the stipulated period by the Appellant.The Respondents filedthecomplaint.TheStateCommissionafter recording the evidences reached to the conclusion that there was deficiency in rendering the service on the part of the Appellant and issued the following directions:-

(3.) It is also contended that as per the clause of the agreement, which binds the Appellant, the Appellant is required to pay compensation @ Rs.10/- per sq.ft. per month starting from the date of default committed by them, hence, the grant of higher rate of interest by the State Commission is illegal. It is, further, contended that agreement between the parties clearly shows that the project was escalation free and for any escalation in the cost, the allottee was not to be charged but the same was to be borne by the Appellant. It is, further, contended that the Respondents have failed to prove on record any actual loss occurred by them on account of the delay in completion of project.It is, further, contended that the work could not be completed in time because of the labour problem who had migrated and no labour was available for completion of the project and the other reasons which were beyond the control of Appellant.