Unitech told to refund over `49L to home buyer
One cannot expect a homebuyer to wait indefinitely for possession of a property when the builder is not in a position to hand it over, the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) said, while asking real estate firm Unitech Ltd to refund more than `49 lakh to a customer.
The NCDRC asked the Unitech Ltd to refund `49,21,840 along with 10 per cent interest per annum to a Delhi resident Sanjeev Miglani, who had booked a flat with the firm’s project at Greater Noida in Uttar Pradesh.
The commission observed that the firm failed to deliver the possession of the flat nine years after the expiry of the stipulated date of delivery and also asked it to pay `10,000 as cost of litigation, apart from refund.
“The opposite party (Unitech) is not in a position to offer possession of the flat. The company shall refund the amount with simple interest at 10 per cent per annum without any further liability. Thus, in our view, this is a case of the opposite party
The commission observed that the firm failed to deliver the possession of the flat nine years after the expiry of the date of delivery and also asked it to pay `10,000 as cost of litigation
not being in a position to offer possession of the flat as the allottee cannot be expected to wait for the property’s possession for an indefinite period,” the bench headed by presiding member Ajit Bharihoke said. According to the complaint, Mr Miglani had booked a flat in “Unitech Horizon”, at Greater Noida in 2006 with an assurance that possession of the flat would be given by November 2008.
The complainant claimed that an amount of `49,21,840 was paid, but the company failed to complete the construction and deliver possession of the apartment even after the expiry of stipulated date of delivery of possession.
The company, however, claimed that the construction had to be stopped due to an agitation by farmers seeking higher compensation as their lands were acquired by the Noida Authority and allotted to Unitech for the project development.
The real estate major also contended that the NGT had passed an interim order on January 11, 2013 restraining all builders in Noida and Greater Noida from extracting any quantity of underground water for the purpose of construction.
The NCDRC also observed that reference to the NGT direction was only an excuse to justify the inordinate delay on the part of the company and asked it to refund the amount.