9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2019 (5) TMI 2006X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t Appeals wherein the appeals filed by the Appellant were decided by partially modifying the order passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC on 02.06.2016 wherein SCDRC directed the Appellant to hand over the physical possession of the units allotted to the Respondents (Complainants), complete in all respects within a period of four months. However, for facility of reference, facts are taken from the complaint fled by Shri D.S. Dhanda. The SCDRC issued the following directions: Consumer Complaint bearing No. 94 of 2016, titled as D.S. Dhanda v. DLF Homes Panchkula Private Limited and Anr. The opposite parties are jointly and severally directed as under: 1. To hand over physical possession of the unit, allotted in favour of the complainant, complete in all respects, as per the terms and conditions of the Agreement, to the complainant, within a period of four months, from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order, on payment of the amount, legally due against him. 2. To execute and get registered the sale deed, in respect of the unit, in question, within one month from the date of handling over possession, as indicated in Clause (i) above, on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rary or whimsical, some reasonable and acceptable rational has to be evident subjectivity has to be minimized. We note that the State Commission has given compensation in two parts, one, by way of interest on the deposited amount from the 'promised'/assured date after taking in view the extension sought vide letter dated 05.06.2013 i.e. 12 months after the 24 months' conveyed and understood time period for completing construction and handling over possession, and, two, a lumpsum amount. If compensation comprises of two parts, (i) by way of interest on the deposited amount from the assured date (milestone date) of completing construction and handling over possession to the actual date of handling over possession, and, (ii) lumpsum amount, we find nothing wrong in it. We do not agree with the builder co.'s contentions that interest on the deposited amount should not be provided since it is not a case of refund but a case of delay in possession. The interest on the deposited amount has to be viewed in the light of the purpose for which it is intended. It is but a way of computing compensation for delay in possession that is commensurate with the amount deposited ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ellant was liable to pay Rs. 10/- per sq. ft. per month for the period of delay. The complaints were fled before the SCDRC alleging delay in delivery of possession of the escalation free fats and compensation on account of delay in handing over possession including mental agony and litigation expenses etc. 5. In the return, the stand of the Appellant was, construction could not be completed on account of stay granted on construction activities by this Court which operated from 19.04.2012 to 12.12.2012. Thereafter, the Appellant sought consent from the Complainant to extend the period of handing over possession by one year vide letter dated 05.06.2013. In the alternative, option was given to get back the money deposited by the Complainant along with simple interest at the rate of 9 per cent per annum. It is also pointed out that on the day reply was fled, construction of 258 independent floors was complete and another 1517 built-up units were near completion. Even occupation certificate has been received for the units for which construction was complete. 6. The similar dispute in respect of same project came up for decision before this Court in DLF Homes Panchkula Pvt. Ltd. and An ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion of Rs. 10/- per sq. ft. per month for the delayed possession as well as the loss of rent per month pleaded by the allottees such as D.S. Dhanda (F.A. No. 853/2016), Sandeep Malik (F.A. No. 1312/2016), Bijender Singh Sangwan (F.A. No. 1314/2016), Kanwal Mohan (F.A. No. 1356/2016). 9. It is contended that since the rental value is not more than the compensation awarded by this Court in the consent order referred to above, therefore, some of the allottees are intentionally not taking possession so as to continue to earn interest under the guise that it is the Appellant who is not handing over the possession. It is contended that in terms of the chart produced in Sushila Devi's case (supra), 9 per cent interest is payable till two months after offer of possession though such Clause does not find specifically mentioned in the order passed by this Court. 10. It is argued that the Appellant will hand over possession only after obtaining occupancy certificate from the Town and Country Planning Department of the State of Haryana and after ensuring that the maintenance works are taken care of by Jones Lang LaSalle-the international real estate maintenance agency. 11. On the other ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on Act, 1986 Act is empowered inter-alia to order the opposite party to pay such amount as may be awarded as compensation to the consumer for any loss or injury suffered by the consumer due to the negligence of the opposite party including to grant punitive damages. But the forums under the Act cannot award interest and/or compensation by applying Rule of thumb. The order to grant interest at the maximum of rate of interest charged by nationalised bank for advancing home loan is arbitrary and no nexus with the default committed. The Appellant has agreed to deliver constructed fats. For delay in handing over possession, the consumer is entitled to the consequences agreed at the time of executing buyer's agreement. There cannot be multiple heads to grant of damages and interest when the parties have agreed for payment of damages at the rate of Rs. 10/- per sq. ft. per month. Once the parties agreed for a particular consequence of delay in handing over of possession then, there has to be exceptional and strong reasons for the SCDRC/NCDRC to award compensation at more than the agreed rate. 17. Though the 1986 Act empowers the authorities to award compensation for any loss or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... maintenance work shall be completed by the Appellant within two months of the offer of possession but the payment of interest at the rate of 9 per cent per annum will be for a period of two months from the date of offer of possession in all situations. v) Since the Complainants have been forced to invoke jurisdiction of the consumer forums, they shall be entitled to consolidated amount of Rs. 50,000/- in each complaint on all accounts such as mental agony and litigation expenses etc. The complainant shall not be entitled to any other amount over and above the amount mentioned above. vi) In case, the original allottee has transferred the fat, the transferee shall be entitled to interest at the rate of 9 per cent per annum from the date of expiry of three years from the agreement or from the date of transfer, whichever is later. CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 4942-4945 OF 2019 (@SLP (C) Nos. 4363-4366 of 2019) 20. Leave granted. 21. The Complainant in these cases have sought refund of the amount deposited by them with the Appellant. The learned SCDRC passed an order on 04.08.2017 directing the Appellant as under: i. To refund the amounts of Rs. 49,25,461/- alongwith simple interest @ 15% ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
