AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Heard counsel for the complainants.
Inspite of service of notice, the opposite party did not put appearance and its right to file reply has been closed vide order dated 22.02.2019.
Above complaint has been filed for directing the opposite party to (i) complete the project and execute sale deed in respect of flats allotted to the complainants vide agreement dated 05.02.2013, (ii) hand over possession of individual flats complete in all respects within a stipulated period, (iii) to obtain occupation certificate from the statutory authority and pay interest @18% per annum on part consideration paid by the complainants from the date of the agreement and to compensate the rent paid by the complainants after September 2015 till the date of handing over possession, (iv) to pay Rs.25000/- as litigation cost and any other relief which is deemed fit and proper in the facts of the case.
The complainants stated that the opposite party was a company incorporated under the Provisions of Companies Act, 2013 and engaged in the business of construction and development of group housing project. The opposite party launched a group housing project in the name of ‘The Lake District’ in the year 2013 and approached the complainants for taking a flat in that project. Believing upon the representation of the opposite party, the complainants booked two pent houses bearing no.1205 & 1206 on the 12th floor of the building to be constructed at Village Yeolewadi, Taluka Haveli, District Pune. The complainants deposited Rs.1788128/- towards part of consideration, Rs.62880/- towards stamp duty and Rs.432880/- towards registration fee and other administrative charges with the opposite party total for both the pent houses. Thereafter, the opposite party had executed an agreement for sale dated 05.02.2013 in which the total consideration of the pent houses was shown at Rs.4336325/- for each of the pent houses. However, the opposite party has not proceeded with the project and has not done any construction on the spot. Clause 15 of the agreement provided due date for fit-out possession as September 2015. As the opposite party was not proceeding with the construction, the complainant gave a legal notice dated 02.07.2016 calling upon the opposite party to hand over possession of the flats allotted to the complainants and also to pay the amount of rent which is being paid by the complainants after due date of possession. Inspite of service of notice, the opposite party has not responded. The complainants thereafter, filed two separate complaints before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Pune on 29.11.2016 which was returned on the ground of pecuniary jurisdiction. Thereafter, this complaint was filed on 19.05.2017.
The complainants have filed affidavit of evidence on 25.03.2019 as well as documents. The payment of the amount of consideration was acknowledged in the agreement for sale which is a registered document and it has been duly proved from the affidavit of evidence filed by the complainants. Since the opposite party is not proceeding with the construction till today, at this stage, counsel for the complainants argued that instead of any direction for possession, opposite party be directed to refund the amount deposited by the complainants. Since the opposite party has neither contested the complaint nor proceeded with the construction. Therefore, the oral request of the counsel for the complainants for refund is liable to be allowed.
ORDER
In the result, the complaint is allowed with cost of Rs.100000/- and the opposite party is directed to refund Rs.2283888/- with interest @9% per annum from the date of deposit till the date of refund within a period of two months.