Case nº Revision Petition No. 3478 Of 2011, (Against the Order dated 12/07/2011 in Appeal No. 139/2011 of the State Commission Chandigarh) of National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, March 06, 2012 (case 1. Amarbir Singh and Ors. 2. Sh Deepender Singh Dhaliwal 3. Ms Sandeep kaur Vs Emaar Mgf Land Ltd. and Anr.)
| Judge | For Appellant: Mr. Bijoy Kumar, Pradhan, Advocate with Mr. Sandeep Bhardwaj, Advocate and For Respondents: Nemo |
| President | Mr. Ashok Bhan, President and Mrs. Vineeta Rai, Member |
| Resolution Date | March 06, 2012 |
| Issuing Organization | National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission |
Order:
Complainants/petitioners entered into an agreement with the respondents for purchase of a flat at Gurgaon for a total consideration of Rs.98,53,380/-. Initially, the complainants paid a sum of Rs.10 lakhs to the respondent on 08.10.2007 towards the booking of the said flat. An agreement was entered into between the parties on 9.2.2008. The complainants/petitioners were asked to make payments as per schedule. They paid Rs.one lakh towards 2nd installment on 03.09.2008, Rs.9,06,338/- towards 3rd installment on 03.09.2008 and Rs.3,53,169/- on 25.3.2009. Another sum of Rs.1 lakh was paid on 08.04.2009. In all, complainants deposited a total sum of Rs.36,25,352/- with the respondents towards the part price of the flat.
On account of financial constraints, the complainants were not able to purchase the said flat. They requested the respondents to allot them an alternate flat of lesser value, but their request was not accepted. Petitioners then wrote a letter to the respondents surrendering the flat and accepting the surrender value after deduction of 10% of the amount deposited. Request was accepted and the respondents refunded the sum of Rs.22,18,654/-. Petitioners, thereafter, filed the complaint before the District Forum alleging that there was no clause in the agreement authorizing the respondents to deduct 10% of the deposited amount. That they had singed the full and final settlement letter and accepted the surrender value of Rs.22,18,654/- under protest.
District Forum allowed the complaint in part and directed the respondents to refund sum of Rs.4,21,360/-, i.e. Rs.3,15,348/- as
brokerage + Rs.1006012/- as interest on delayed payment along-with interest @ 9% p.a. Complaint qua other reliefs was dismissed.
Complainants/petitioners being aggrieved filed the appeal before the State Commission which has been dismissed by the impugned order.
State Commission relying upon the letter written by the petitioners asking the respondents to refund the amount deposited by them after deducting 10% of the basic price coupled with Clause 6 of the Agreement and the judgment of Supreme Court in "HUDA & Anr. V. Kewal Krishan Goel & Ors. 1996 AIR 1981" in which it has been held as under:
This being the legal position and the allotee hating accepted the allotment and having made some payment on installment basis then made the request to surrender the land, has committed default on his part and therefore the...
To continue reading
Request your trial