AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Ram Surat Ram Maurya, Presiding Member
Heard Mr. Ram Naresh Yadav, Advocate, for the appellants.
The complainants have filed above appeal from the order of State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, U.T. Chandigarh dated 12.11.2013, passed in Consumer Complaint No.53 of 2013, whereby the complaint was allowed with cost of Rs.20000/- and the respondents were directed to handover possession of Flat No. L-201, on the booking price, after taking balance consideration and pay delayed compensation @ Rs.5/- per sq.ft. per month on super area, from 01.12.2012 till the delivery of possession and compensation of Rs.one lac for mental agony and harassment, with default clause.
The office has reported that the appeal has been filed with 5 days delay. The appellants have filed IA/8180/2013, for condonation of delay, in which sufficient cause has been shown for condonation of delay. Delay in filing the appeal is condoned. IA/8180/2013 is allowed.
Sandeep Kumar and Dilbag Singh (the appellants) filed CC/53/2013, for directing the respondents (i) to pay interest @18% per month on Rs.3651230/- i.e. the amount deposited by the complainants after taking loan, (ii) to pay Rs.9000/- per month from 31.08.2012, i.e. rent paid by the complainants, (iii) to handover possession of Flat No.L-201, after obtaining occupation and completion certificate, (iv) to pay delayed compensation in terms of clause-35 of the agreement, (v) to pay Rs.150000/- as compensation for mental pain and agony, (vi) to pay Rs.25000/- as the cost of litigation and (vii) any other relief which is deemed fit and proper be awarded to the complainants.
The complainants stated that the opposite parties launched a project of group housing in the name of “Jaipuria’s Sunrise Greens”, at VIP Road, Zirakpur, district Mohali, Punjab, in the year 2010. The complainants booked a flat on 19.02.2011, in the said project and paid Rs576500/-. The opposite parties allotted Unit No. L-201, on 07.03.2011, for basic sale price of Rs.3843400/- In the allotment letter expected date of possession was given as 31.08.2012. As per payment plan of the opposite parties, the complainants deposited Rs.3651230/- up to June, 2012. Out of which, Rs.2306040/- was taken as loan from State Bank of Patiala, Chandigarh, on which, the bank was charging interest @11.25% per annum. The balance amount was payable at the time of offer of possession. The complainants were residing in a rented accommodation on the rent of Rs.9000/-per month. Due to delay in giving possession, they were paying rent continuously. As per clause-35 of the agreement, the opposite parties are liable to pay delayed compensation at the rate of Rs.5/- per months, per sq.ft. of the super area, which come to Rs.8735/- per month. The opposite parties are not giving possession and the date fixed has expired. The project was still not complete.
The opposite party filed its written reply and contested the complaint. The material facts as stated in the complaint have not been disputed. It has been stated that the date of possession as mentioned in the allotment letter as 31.08.2012, was only under “Down Payment Plan”. The complainants have not opted for “Down Payment Plan” rather they paid the two monthly instalments as such that date would not be applicable for them. In civil construction work, time could not be essence of contract. As per clause-35 of the agreement, the opposite parties have agreed to pay delayed compensation at the rate of Rs.5/- per month, per sq.ft. of the super area, which would be payable at the time of offer of possession. The complainants have claimed Rs.972538/- as compensation, on total payment of Rs.3651230/- up to June, 2012, which is highly excessive.
The complainants filed Affidavit of Evidence of Sandeep Kumar and Dilbag Singh and documentary evidence. The respondents filed Affidavit of Evidence of Rajneesh Sharma. State Commission, after hearing the complainant, by judgment dated 12.11.2013, held that as per payment plan, last instalment was payable till 31.08.2012 as such possession ought to have been handed over till 30.11.2012 but possession has not been handed over, as such, there was deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. On these findings the complaint was allowed and order as stated above has been passed. Hence this appeal has been filed, claiming interest @18% per annum on the amount deposited by the appellant and rent as paid.
I have considered the arguments of the counsel for the appellants and examined the record. In paragraph-6 of the written arguments, the appellants have admitted that possession was handed over to them in June, 2014. State Commission has found due date of possession was 30.11.2012. Therefore, total delay in handing over possession was 19 months. Under the order of State Commission, the complainants are entitled to Rs.165965/- as delayed compensation and Rs.one lac as compensation for mental agony and harassment.
Supreme Court in Banglore Development Authority Vs. Syndicate Bank, (2007) 6 SCC 711 , held that in the matter of civil construction work, time cannot be an essence of contract. It has been further held that in the matter of contractual obligation, there was no scope for compensation for mental agony and harassment. Since the allottees would get property with appreciated value on the price of booking as such further compensation was not payable. Supreme Court in Wg. Camdr Arifur Rahman Khan Vs. DLF Southern Home Pvt. Ltd., (2020) 16 SCC 769, held that compensation at the rate of Rs.5/- per month, per sq.ft. on super area is a meagre amount and delayed compensation was payable in the shape of interest @6% per annum, from due date of possession till the date of offer of possession. Although in this case, Supreme Court has held that amount of delayed compensation paid at the rate of Rs.5/- per month, per sq.ft. on super area would not be recovered but this is not a precedent.
As State Commission has already granted sufficient compensation, as such I propose for a further lump sum compensation of Rs.one lac, which will cover interest @6% per annum.
ORDER
In view of the aforesaid discussions, the appeal is partly allowed. The opposite parties shall give Rs.one lac, as delayed compensation, to the appellants in addition to what has been paid under the order of State Commission, within a period of two months from the date of judgment.