MANU DEV DAHIYA Vs. ANSAL BUILDWELL LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The complainants booked a residential unit with the OP in a project namely 'Ansal Crown Heights' which the OP was to develop in Faridabad. Vide allotment letter dated 22.10.2012, flat no.1803 in Tower-I of the said project was allotted to the complainants. The parties then executed a Flat Buyers Agreement on 22.10.2012 incorporating their respective obligations in respect of the said allotment. As per clause 4 of the agreement, the possession was to be delivered within 36 months of its execution subject to force majeure circumstances. The possession therefore, ought to have been delivered to the complainant by 22.10.2015. The grievance of the complainants is that the possession has not been offered to them and even the construction is not complete despite they having paid as much as Rs.88,29,340/- to the OP. The complainants therefore, approached this Commission, seeking either delivery of possession of the allotted flat within six months of the filing of the complaint or refund of the amount paid by them to the OP alongwith compensation etc.

(2.) The complaint was resisted by the OP primarily on the ground on which CC No.567 of 2017 Rakesh Hans and Anr. Vs. M/s Ansal Crown Infrabuilt Pvt. Ltd. decided on 12.07.2018 was contested. The said grounds, as noted in the above referred decision, are as under:

(3.) As far as pecuniary jurisdiction is concerned, in terms of Section 21 of the Consumer Protection Act, this Commission possesses the requisite pecuniary jurisdiction where the value of the goods or services as the case may be and the compensation claimed exceeds Rs.1 Crore. As held by a three Members Bench of this Commission in CC No.97 of 2016 Ambrish Kumar Shukla and Ors. Vs. Ferrous Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., decided on 07.10.2016, the value of the services in such a case would mean the sale amount agreed to be paid by the flat buyer to the developer. In the present case, the agreed sale consideration was Rs.94,43,172/-. If even a part of the compensation claimed by the complainants is added to the said sale consideration, the aggregate would be much above Rs.1 Crore. Therefore, it would be difficult to say that this Commission does not possess the requisite pecuniary jurisdiction.