9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (7) TMI 1351X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r option but to knock door after door and hoping against hope that he ould be able to get his money back. In the present case, the Petitioner entered into the agreement way back in the year 2012. In five years, the Petitioner has pumped in over Rs. 76 lakhs. A 'No Dues Certificate' has been given to the Petitioner. Structural defects have been found out in the construction after certain persons started occupying the flats. Petitioners and several other persons have been left in lurch and have been forced to knock the doors of various forums. NBCC is an instrumentality of the State. It is well settled that the 'State' is duty bound to act reasonably and fairly. In NOIDA ENTREPRENEURS ASSOCIATION VERSUS NOIDA ORS. [ 2011 (5) TMI 1043 - SUPREME COURT ], the Apex Court held that the State or the public authority which holds the property of the public acts as a trustee, and therefore, has to act fairly and reasonably. The State or the instrumentality of the State is accountable to the people and it is supposed to act in public good promoting public interest. An action of a State or the instrumentality of the State stands vitiated if it lacks bonafides. Admittedly, the to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e petitioners with reciprocal interest @ 15% per annum and with compensation of Rs. 50,00,000/- for mental torture, agony, and harassment; and to pay extra compensation as per Annexure P-18 iii. Pass such other and further order as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice. 2. The facts leading up to the present petition are as follows: a. Respondent No.1, in June 2012, launched a group housing residential project under the name of NBCC Green View Apartments that was to be constructed in Section 37, Gurugram, Haryana. In response to the said project a large number of applicants, including the Petitioner who is a retired government employee, applied for allotment of apartments specially earmarked for government servants. The Petitioner booked an apartment in the aforementioned project on 23.06.2012 by depositing a sum of Rs. 2,08,334/- and was consequently issued an allotment letter by Respondent No. 1 on 02.11.2012 for flat bearing No. C2.3. b. The total consideration for the flat was a sum of Rs. 76,85,576/- that was paid in a timely manner by the Petitioner, in various instalments corresponding to the following schedule : A No Dues Certificate was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ment, if any, paid by the Petitioner. 3. Since the flat was not delivered to the Petitioner, even after six years of the final instalment and about 10 years after the first application money was paid and that since the Respondents were not providing any alternate accommodation to the Petitioners, the Petitioners have filed the instant writ petition. 4. Notice was issued in the writ petition. On 31.01.2023, the Petitioner made his claim for an alternate accommodation in the vicinity. 5. The writ petition came up for hearing on 23.01.2023. Learned Counsel for the NBCC was directed to take instructions in respect of alternate accommodation. On 31.01.2023, the learned Counsel for the NBCC made a submission that the Petitioner had approached the RERA in Gurgaon. He submitted that more than 250 flat buyers had already approached the NCDRC and RERA. It was also stated by the learned Counsel for the NBCC that since the Petitioner had already approached the various forums, the writ petition should not be admitted. 6. This Court on 31.01.2023, directed the NBCC to pay a sum of Rs. 30,000/- per month after deducting TDS to the Petitioners. Since the Respondent/NBCC was not complying with the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... m shopping. He states that after having approached the forums under the RERA Act and under the Consumer Protection Act, the instant writ petition should not be entertained by this Court by exercising its powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 11. It is stated by learned Counsel for the Respondent that the Petitioner is guilty of concealing material facts inasmuch as the Petitioners herein have impleaded themselves in the NCDRC in a petition titled as Avdesh Chandra Bhatia Ors. (now Narinder Singh Arneja Ors.) v. NBCC Ors. Complaint No. CC/1128/2017. It is stated that the Petitioners have also impleaded themselves in a complaint filed before Haryana RERA. It is stated that the present writ petition has been filed concealing the above said two facts. 12. The Respondent places reliance under Section 79 of the RERA Act. Learned Counsel for the Respondent states that there is a bar under Section 79 of the RERA Act whereby civil courts cannot entertain any suit or proceedings in respect of the matter which falls under the jurisdiction of RERA. Learned Counsel for the Respondent also relies on the following judgments to buttress his contentions:- a) Upendra Choudhury v. Bu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iver what was promised, they shatter the trust and financial security of homebuyers and also put homebuyers in a situation where they may face immense stress, anxiety, uncertainty and ultimately be forced to navigate legal channels for seeking recourse. The emotional toll of living in limbo, uncertain about the future of their investment and the stability of their living arrangements cannot be understated. Compensating wronged homebuyers is not just a matter of rectifying past injustices but also about deterring future misconduct. 17. In the present case, the Petitioner entered into the agreement way back in the year 2012. In five years, the Petitioner has pumped in over Rs. 76 lakhs. A 'No Dues Certificate' has been given to the Petitioner. Structural defects have been found out in the construction after certain persons started occupying the flats. Petitioners and several other persons have been left in lurch and have been forced to knock the doors of various forums. 18. The pittance offered by the Respondents to only return the principal amount without any interest cannot be said to be an offer in the eyes of law especially when the Court can take judicial notice of the f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he last seven years and has been put to extreme mental agony, this Court is inclined to direct the NBCC to pay a sum of Rs.5 lakh to the Petitioner. 23. The writ petition is allowed. Pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of. CONT.CAS(C) 1294/2023 CM APPL. 3311/2024 1. The instant contempt petition has been filed by the Petitioner alleging violation of the Orders dated 31.01.2023 and 23.05.2023 passed by this Court in W.P.(C) 824/2023. 2. This Court vide Order dated 31.01.2023 had directed the Respondent to pay a sum of Rs. 30,000/- per month after deducting TDS to the Petitioners. 3. On 23.05.2023, this Court had directed the Respondent/NBCC to comply with the Order dated 31.01.2023 directing the Respondent to pay a sum of Rs.30,000/- per month to the Petitioner. 4. Material on record indicates that the amounts have been paid to the Petitioner. Undoubtedly, this Court had attempted to ensure that the Petitioner gets an alternate accommodation but the Petitioner was not satisfied with the accommodations shown by the officials of the NBCC on the ground that they are not of the same value or in the same vicinity. 5. In view of the fact that pursuant to the Order dated 23.05.2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
