NCDRC Rules Against DK Realty, Orders Full Refund and Interest for Delayed Project

NCDRC Rules Against DK Realty, Orders Full Refund and Interest for Delayed Project

The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC), headed by Justice Ram Surat Ram Maurya and Dr Inder Jit Singh, partly allowed a consumer complaint against D.K. Realty India Pvt. Ltd. for the delay in delivering flats in their "Livsmart" housing project. The Commission held the company liable for the delay and directed them to refund the entire amount deposited along with 9 per cent interest per annum.

The complaint was lodged by Amresh Pednekar (the complainant) against D.K. Realty (India) Pvt. Ltd. (the opposite party). Pednekar had entered into an agreement to purchase a flat in the "Livsmart" housing project developed by D.K. Realty, relying on the representations made by the company regarding the project's amenities and facilities. The flat was booked in April 2016 with a payment of ₹6,46,727. Subsequently, an Agreement for Sale was executed in May 2016, stipulating a construction completion timeline initially set for December 2018, with the possibility of an extension to December 2019.

In strict adherence to the stipulated payment schedules, Pednekar deposited a total payment of ₹18,34,461. However, the promised commencement and completion of construction did not happen within the agreed timelines. This delay placed significant financial strain on Pednekar, compounded by the EMIs for the loan taken to facilitate instalment payments. Despite making multiple attempts to establish communication with the company through letters and emails, wherein he requested the cancellation of the allotment and a refund, Pednekar received no response. Consequently, he initiated a consumer claim, seeking not only a refund but also compensation for what he deemed to be unfair trade practices.

Upon careful examination of all arguments and records submitted, NCDRC observed that the agreement included a stipulated two-year lock-in period commencing from January 3, 2016, during which cancellation was restricted. However, the complainant had formally requested cancellation and a refund via a letter dated January 2, 2019, followed by several subsequent emails, none of these communication attempts were acknowledged or answered by D.K. Realty.

Moreover, the NCDRC noted that the complainant, due to an unjustifiable delay in construction, possessed the legitimate right to rescind the agreement and seek a refund. Consequently, the Commission partially upheld the complaint. They instructed the opposite party to reimburse the entire amount deposited by the complainant, coupled with an interest rate of 9 per cent per annum calculated from the deposit date to the refund date. This reimbursement was mandated to be fulfilled within two months from the date of the Commission's decision. Additionally, the opposite party was granted the option to use the refunded amount to settle the complainant's loan initially, with any remaining balance to be returned to the complainant.