(1.) Challenge in this Revision Petition filed under section 21 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short the 'Act'), is to the order dated 14.06.2018 in FA/15/647 passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Maharashtra, Circuit Bench at Pune (hereinafter referred to as 'the State Commission'). By the impugned order, the State Commission has partly allowed the Appeal preferred by the Petitioners/Complainants, directing the Opposite Party, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Developer') to handover possession of flat within one month from the date of entire payment of the remaining consideration alongwith interest @18% p.a. to be paid by the Complainant from 01.02.2012 till the date of the order. The Complainant was directed to deposit the entire remaining consideration of Rs.9,60,000/- with interest @18% within six weeks intimating the Developer and upon such intimation, the Developer was directed to handover the possession to the Petitioners/Complainants. Aggrieved by this order, the Petitioners/Complainants preferred this Revision Petition
(2.) The facts, in brief, of the case are that the Complainants booked a flat with the Developer in its 'Devang Complex' project for a total consideration of Rs.12,00,000/- and paid a sum of Rs.2,40,000/- for which an Agreement was executed on 19.01.2011. The Complainants approached the Financial Corporation for a loan which was sanctioned but not disbursed. Since the Agreement did not specify the exact date of delivery of possession, it is averred that the Complainants approached the Developer to rectify the Agreement to that effect, but the same was not done. Hence the Complainants sought a direction to the Developer to rectify Clause 6 in the Agreement and handover the possession of the flat completing the construction and accepting the remaining consideration together with other reliefs.
(3.) The Developer filed their Written Version admitting the execution of the Agreement, the total sale-consideration, but contended that there is no deficiency in service on their part as the Complainants did not adhere to the terms of the payment and hence the Agreement was terminated and therefore, sought for dismissal of the Complaint.