M. Shreesha, Presiding Member - (1.) Aggrieved by the order dated 12.07.2018 in CC No. 1202 of 2015 passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Delhi (for short the "State Commission"), the Complainant preferred this Appeal under Section 19 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short "the Act"). By the impugned order, the State Commission while allowing the Complaint directed the Opposite Parties (hereinafter referred to as "the Developer") to refund the principal amount paid by the Complainant along with interest @ 8% p.a. from the date of receipt of the amount till its realization with compensation of Rs. 50,000/- for the mental agony. The Complainant preferred this Appeal seeking enhancement of the amounts awarded by the State Commission together with increase in the rate of interest.
(2.) Briefly put, the facts of the case are that the Complainant had entered into an Agreement with the Developer on 01.03.2008 for a three bed-room apartment in the project of Developer titled "Parsvnath Privilege" for a total consideration of Rs. 41,57,000/-. It was averred that despite making all the payments as per the schedule, the construction of the flat was incomplete though the promised date of delivery of possession was May, 2010. It was stated that though the Complainant wanted to choose the Construction Linked Payment Plan the dealing Commercial Manager convinced the Complainant to choose the Time Linked Payment Plan and having been assured by him, the Complainant opted for Plan 'C' mode of payment i.e. Tine Linked Payment Plan. In case the possession of the subject residential unit was not handed over by May, 2010, Clause 10(c) of the Flat Buyer Agreement comes into play. Clause 10(c) stipulates that the Developer shall pay to the Buyer compensation @ Rs. 5/- per sq. ft. of the super area of the flat per month for the period of delay. When the Complainant visited the site in October, 2008, she realized that the construction work at the site had come to a total standstill. Thereafter she addressed a letter to the Developer on 03.02.2009 requesting for converting the payment from Plan 'C' to Plan 'B' which is a Construction Link Payment Plan. She received reply on 10.06.2010 stating that the construction activity of the project had slowed down and they were re-scheduling the Plan and proposed to complete the Project by March, 2012. The Complainant was also informed that they have organized dedicated funds for the Project from Punjab National Bank.
(3.) It was averred that despite making multiple visits to the Project site, the construction was far from being complete despite all the payments duly made by the Complainant. The Complainant was constrained to seek monetary help from her parents, had to bear the burden of rental accommodation, had suffered medical exigency as her husband had suffered from double slip disk in March, 2012 which added to the pressure for looking for an alternate rental accommodation. The Complainant and her husband moved back to Chandigarh as they had to make the decision of moving base out of Delhi as they could pay the high rentals. The photographs that were taken on 25.11.2015 show the stage of ongoing construction. Vexed with their attitude the Complainant approached the State Commission seeking the following reliefs:- a) Refund the money paid by the Complainant i.e. Rs. 42,59,465/- along with interest @ 24% p.a. compounded along with past, pendent lite and future interest @ 24% p.a. compounded till the date of actual realization of the payment; b) Pay penalty charges @ Rs. 5/- per sq. ft. p.m. on the flat havinv super area of 1855 sq. ft. along with pendent lite and future compensation @ 24% p.a. for the period of delay till the date of actual realization of the amount; c) Pay Rs. 20 lakhs to the Complainant towards compensation; d) Pay the litigation expenses as decided by the State Commission; & e) Any other order, relief or direction which the State Commission may deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the case.;