Mumbai: The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) has directed a real estate developer to refund Rs81.99 lakh with 9% interest per annum to a home buyer who did not get possession of a booked flat.
The firm had contended before the commission that the date of completion had changed after the project was registered with the Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (Maha RERA).
Order passed
The order was passed on a complaint by Chandra Satra and two others against L&T Parel Project LLP and four others. Engaged in the business of group housing projects, L&T Parel came up with ‘Crescent Bay’ in Parel-Sewree division in 2015 and made wide publicity of its facilities and amenities. Believing in the representation, Chandra and Jigar Satra booked a flat.
The booking application form contained ‘construction-linked payment plan’ under which 19% of the total consideration had to be paid as ‘earned money’ till July 2015 and other instalments payable on the start of ‘excavation’ at other stages of construction.
The complainants deposited the earnest money till Sept 2015. By Sept 2017, they paid Rs81.99 lakh. In Nov that year, on visiting the site, they realised that no construction had started. They then sought details of completion of the project to which the developer did not give a period but assured that interest of 7.5% per annum on the deposited amount will be paid and possession would be given within 42 months.
After the constitution of Maha RERA, when the project got registered, the new date was August 2021. This led to the complainant giving a legal notice for refund that was not paid and a complaint was filed.
The developer contended that the booking form didn’t contain any clause giving a date for completion and after registration with MahaRERA the new date was August 2021, which was further revised to March 2022. They further stated that complainants were defaulters, and that they completed the project despite Covid and an email was sent to complainants in May 2022 to take possession.
The commission stated that although the booking form didn’t mention any time for possession “a reasonable time of three years may be inferred”. It added that the project was not started within three years of the booking and there was nothing on record on behalf of the opposite parties to prove otherwise.
