KAMALNAYAN GUPTA & ANR Vs. UNITECH LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The complainants namely Kamalnayan Gupta and Bhavana P Gupta booked a residential villa with the OP in a project namely 'Unitech South Park, which the OP was to develop in Sector 70 of Gurgaon. Vide allotment letter dated 01.08.2011, house no. 0203 in Block-B4 in the aforesaid project was allotted to the complainants for a consideration of Rs.7884042/-. The parties then executed an agreement dated 17.08.2011, incorporating their respective obligations in respect of the said transaction. In terms of clause 4.a(i) of the said agreement, the possession was to be delivered within 36 months of the execution of the agreement. The possession therefore, ought to have been offered by 17.08.2014. The grievance of the complainants is that the construction is not complete and possession has not been delivered to them despite they having already paid Rs.7813986/- to the OP. The complainants are, therefore, before this Commission seeking refund of the aforesaid amount alongwith interest etc.

(2.) The opposite party filed its written version contesting the complaint but has not filed affidavit by way of evidence. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.

(3.) The learned counsel for the complainants states that several other consumer complaints in respect of this very project have already been allowed by this Commission rejecting the grounds on which the complaints were contested. A reference in this regard is made to CC No. 182 of 2015 Ranjana Nagpal & Anr. Vs. M/s Unitech Limited & Anr. decided on 29.09.2016. Reference is also made to several other decisions passed by this Commission following its decision in Ranjana Nagpal (supra), which to the extent it is relevant, reads as under:-