VIMLA BANSAL Vs. UNITECH LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The complainant booked a residential flat with the opposite party in a project, namely, 'Unitech Habitat' which the opposite party was to develop in Sector Pi-II of Greater Noida in U.P. Vide letter dated 17.10.2006, apartment No.402 in the above-referred project was allotted to the complainant for a consideration of Rs.71,61,516/-. As per Clause 4a(i) of the terms and conditions of allotment, the possession was to be delivered within 36 months thereof, meaning thereby that the possession ought to have been offered by 17.10.2009. The case of the complainant is that the possession has not been offered and even the construction is not complete despite she having already paid Rs.68,40,064/- to the OP. The aforesaid amount was wrongly mentioned as Rs.64,55,191/- in the consumer complaint but the OP has stated in its written version that the amount paid by the complainant is Rs.68,40,064/-. Since the possession has not been offered to the complainant, she is before this Commission seeking possession of the allotted flat alongwith compensation etc.

(2.) The opposite party has filed written version contesting the complaint on several grounds. In the written version, the OP has admitted the allotment made to the complainant as well as the payment received from her. It is also not in dispute that the allotted flat has not been offered to the complainant till date.

(3.) The learned counsel for the complainant states on instructions from the son of the complainant who is present in the Court that considering the considerable time which has already elapsed since institution of this complaint in the year 2015 and the possession of the allotted flat having still not been offered, the construction not being complete the complainant is no more interested in waiting any more for the possession of the flat and wants refund of the entire amount paid by her to the OP alongwith appropriate compensation.