PRESIDENT
NATIONAL
CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
NEW
DELHI
CONSUMER
CASE NO. 427,430-440 of 2014
Versus
M/s Unitech
LTD (Opposite party –OP)
Para 10 . Since the
delay in construction of the apartments could not be justified by the OP, it is
required to pay compensation to the flat buyers. The contention of the learned counsel for the
OP is that such compensation has to be calculated @ ₹5/- per sq. ft. of the super area of the apartment for the period of
delay in offering the possession beyond the period
indicated in clause 4.a.i of the Buyers Agreement, the complainants having
agreed to the aforesaid term while agreeing to purchase the apartments. This was also the contention of the learned
counsel for the OP that the terms of the contract are binding on the parties
and cannot be altered by a consumer forum.
The learned counsel
for the complainant on the other hand, submitted that since they are required
to pay interest to the OP @18% p.a. compounding quarterly, in the event of
delay in making payment as stipulated in clause 2.c of the Buyers Agreement,
there is no reason why the opposite party should not pay interest at the same
rate to them, as compensation. The
learned counsel for the parties, however, admitted that the current interest of
taking housing loans from the banks is about 10% p.a. though it had shot up to
11.5% per annum in last few years. It is also an admitted position that had
the complainants deposited their money with a bank in a FDR instead of
investing in the project of the OP, they would have earned interest @ about10%
p.a.
Warm Regards
For FEDERATION
OF RESIDENTS WELFARE ASSOCIATION
KULDEEP KUMAR
KOHLI
PRESIDENT
No comments:
Post a Comment