Real-estate firm to pay over Rs 21 L for unfair trade practice

A real-estate firm has been asked by Delhi state consumer commission to pay over Rs 21 lakh to a 68-year-old man and his wife for retaining their money for two apartments "without any justification" and delaying the construction.
The Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission asked Delhi-based Omaxe Buildhome Pvt Ltd to pay Rs 21.05 lakh to Gurgaon residents S P Kalra and Chanda Kalra, saying that the firm's act of retaining the couple's money "certainly amounts to not only deficiency of service but also proves indulgence of Opposite Party (firm) to unfair trade practice".
"The project was to be completed within 30 months and complainants were entitled to get possession of the flats during this period, but the construction of the flats was unduly delayed," the commission, comprising its judicial member S A Siddiqui and member S C Jain, said.

It noted that even at this belated stage, the firm was not committing that it was ready and willing to hand over the possession of the property in near future.
"The deposited amount of Rs 19,85,375 is still held up by the Opposite Party (OP); it was the bounded duty of the OP to have returned the amount deposited by the complainants (couple)...
"Since the OP has retained the entire amount without any justification whatsoever it certainly amounts to not only deficiency of service but also proves indulgence of the OP to unfair trade practice," it said.

The commission directed the firm to refund Rs 19,85,375 to the couple which they had paid for both the apartments.

It directed the firm to pay Rs one lakh as compensation for harassment, mental pain and agony and inconvenience caused to the couple and Rs 20,000 as costs of litigation.
The couple told the commission that they had booked two apartments in Greater Noida and Noida by paying Rs 10,94,375 and Rs 8,91,000 respectively.
However, after some time they noticed that construction of the projects was not progressing and requested for refund, they claimed.
However, when the firm did not respond in a proper manner, they sent a legal notice to it and later filed a complaint before the commission against the builder for refund of money deposited and other reliefs.

The firm, however, denied the allegations against it and prayed for cancellation of the complaint.