National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission: The complainant in a recent case before NCRDC had complained that a sales representative of the Unitech Ltd. approached him in 2006 to purchase a residential apartment in a new project of the respondent to be developed in Noida, UP. The complainant alleged that he was lured by the promises of the representative that the flat would be handed over to him within 36 months and in consequence, applied for the allotment of an apartment by entering into a builder-buyer agreement with the respondent.
The case of the complainant is that the opposite party has failed to complete the construction and deliver possession of the apartment after expiry of stipulated date of delivery of possession and has affidavit to support allegations made in the complaint. The Commission after going through all the allegations and all documents and agreements, concluded that it was not just a case of delay on part of builder to deliver possession, but a case in which builder was not in a position to offer possession of the apartment at all.
Thereafter, the Bench comprising Mr. Ajit Bharihoke (Presiding Member) and Mr. Anup K. Thakur (Member) directed refund of the amount paid by the complainant with simple interest of 10% per annum and observed that in such a case where builder is not in a position to deliver possession of the apartment even after 8 years, it would be wrong to expect to wait for possession of apartment for an indefinite period. [Shalini Lanbah v. M/s Unitech Ltd., 2017 SCC OnLine NCDRC 525, decided on 05.10.2017]
