AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The present Review Application has been filed by DLF Home Developers Ltd./Opposite Party under Section 22(2) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (in short “the Act”) seeking Review of the Order dated 30.12.2021 passed by this Commission in Consumer Complaint No. 2168 of 2018 whereby Consumer Complaint filed by the Complainant was allowed, as under:-
“17. In the aforesaid decision, the Co-ordinate Bench of this Commission rejecting the defence of force-majeure conditions taken by the Developer, has directed the Developer to charge additional amount on account of increase in the super area of the Apartment from the Complainant and to pay compensation in the form of simple interest @7% p.a. from the expected date for delivery of possession till the date on which the possession was actually offered to the Allottees.
At this juncture, it would not be out of place to mention here that against the aforesaid judgement of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Commission, Civil Appeal Nos. 3864-3889 of 2020 were filed before the Hon’ble Supreme Court.The Hon’ble Apex Court, Vide its order dated 14.12.2020, has dismissed the Civil Appeals filed by the Developer, with modification to the extent that the compensation on account of delay in handing over possession of the flats to the flat buyer is reduced from 7% to 6%.
In the present case, the possession of the booked Apartment had already been handed over to the Complainant in August 2017 prejudice to his rights and claims.
Respectfully following the aforesaid decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court and the Co-ordinate Bench of this Commission, we are of the considered view that the Developer is entitled to the additional demand on account of increase in the Super Area of the Apartment and the Developer shall be liable to pay compensation in the form of simple interest @ 6% p.a. from the expected date of delivery of possession till handing over the actual possession. This apart, the Developer shall pay a sum of ₹50,000/- to the Complainant towards the costs of litigation.
The Consumer Complaint is allowed in above terms.The pending applications, if any, also stand disposed off.”
The Applicant/Opposite Party Developer has sought Review of the Order dated 30.12.2021 to the extent that compensation be directed to be paid till offer of possession instead of till handing over the actual possession on the ground that the present case is fully covered by earlier Judgment dated 03.01.2020 passed by this Commission in C.C. No. 351 of 2015 and other connected matters titled as “Capital Green Flat Buyers Association Vs. DLF Home Developers Ltd. & Ors.”, which related to the same Project and on the same issues, wherein compensation in the form of simple interest @7% per annum was directed to be paid from the expected date for delivery of possession till the date on which the possession was actually offered to the allottees. The Order dated 03.01.2020 passed by this Commission in “Capital Green Flat Buyers Association Vs. DLF Home Developers Ltd. & Ors.” (Supra) was modified and affirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court In Civil Appeal No. 3864-3889 of 2020, vide Order dated 14.12.2020, wherein compensation was reduced from 7% to 6% and direction for refund of parking charges and club charges and interest thereon was set aside.
It was further submitted that respectfully following the above-Judgments, this Commission has passed the Order dated 30.12.2021 in the present Consumer Complaint but compensation was directed to be paid till handing over the actual possession instead of date of offer of the possession of the Flat as passed in “Capital Green Flat Buyers Association Vs. DLF Home Developers Ltd. & Ors.” (Supra).
It was further submitted that even the Complainant/Non-Applicant had filed IA No. 3344 / 2021 in CC No. 2168 / 2018 and relied upon both the Judgments passed by this Commission “Capital Green Flat Buyers Association Vs. DLF Home Developers Ltd. & Ors.” (Supra) as well as the Hon’ble Supreme Court and submitted that the present Consumer Complaint is squarely covered by these Judgments.
It was further submitted that in terms of the Orders passed by this Commission and the Hon’ble Supreme Court, compensation is directed to be paid till the date when the possession was offered on 17.02.2017 after receipt of Occupancy Certificate on 14.10.2016. The Applicant/Opposite Party has also submitted that it is upto the allottee as to when he chooses to make the final payment and complete the possession formalities and comes forward to take possession, therefore the Developer must not be held accountable for payment of delay compensation beyond the date when he validly offers possession. Thus in the present case, delay compensation be directed to be paid only till the date of offer of possession i.e., till 17.02.2017. It was submitted that there is a mistake apparent on the face of the record, which warrants recall of the Order dated 30.12.2021 passed by this Commission and it was prayed that the compensation be directed to be paid from the expected date of delivery of the Flat till the date of offer of possession of the Flat, i.e., 17.02.2017.
Having perused the material available on record, Order dated 30.12.2021 and the grounds taken in the Review Application, we are of the considered view that there is apparent error on the face of the record, which warrants our interference and direction given vide Order dated 30.12.2021 “20......the Developer shall be liable to pay compensation in the form of simple interest @ 6% p.a. from the expected date of delivery of possession till handing over the actual possession. This apart, the Developer shall pay a sum of ₹50,000/- to the Complainant towards the costs of litigation.” is recalled and the Order dated 30.12.2021 passed by this Commission is modified to the extent that “20......the Developer shall be liable to pay compensation in the form of simple interest @ 6% p.a. from the expected date of delivery of possession till the date of offer of possession, i.e., 17.02.2017. This apart, the Developer shall pay a sum of ₹50,000/- to the Complainant towards the costs of litigation.”
The Review Application stands disposed off in above terms.