ATS Golf Meadows Refund Consumer Complaint for Delay

ATS Golf Meadows Refund Consumer Complaint for Delay

by

Last Updated on August 18, 2022 by Satish Mishra

Post covers CONSUMER COMPLAINT AGAINST M/S ATS ESTATES PVT. LTD. seeking refund for delay in possession in Golf Meadows.

CONSUMER COMPLAINT AGAINST M/S ATS ESTATES PVT. LTD

Bringing you the case Digest on consumer complaint against M/s Ats Estate Pvt. Ltd. in State Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission Punjab, Chandigarh. Wherein consumer purchased a unit and the opposite party failed to deliver possession of the unit within the Stipulated Period. Then homebuyer sought refund of the amount from builder along with interest, compensation & litigation cost for mental pain and harassment.

Also Read- Buyers entitled to full refund if flat not given on time: Court

Now let’s have the Judgment –

Judgment digest

State Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission

Mr. Sonika Phaugat v. M/S Ats Estate Pvt. Ltd.

Date of Decision – 23rd April, 2019

Complainant:

  1. Mrs. Sonika Phaugat W/o Mr. Jasbir Solanki, resident of C-32, AWHO, Sector 4, MDC, Panchkula, Haryana.
  2. Mr. Raj Singh Phaugat S/o Mr. M.S. Phaugat, resident of U-298, Mahinder Vihar, MDC, Sector-4, (Army Flats), Panchkula, Haryana-134109.

Opposites:

  1. M/s ATS Estate Private Limited, having its site office at ATS Golf Meadows, Derabassi, District S.A.S. Nagar (Mohali), through its Managing Director/authorized officer/Branch officer. [email protected].
  2. M/s ATS Estate Private Limited, having its Corporate Office at ATS Tower, Plot no.16, Sector 135, Noida, through its Managing Director/Authorized Officer. Email-email@ atsgreens.com
  3. Mr. Geetamber Anand, Managing Director, M/s ATS Estate Private Limited, having its Corporate Office at ATS Tower, Plot no.16, Sector 135, Noida. Email-getamber@ atsgreens.com.

Quoram:

Shri J. S. Klar, Presiding Judicial Member

Shri Rajinder Kumar Goyal, Member

Also Read- Flat possession delayed, ATS told to refund Rs 53L – Tribune 

Facts of the Case:

  1. That complainant no.1 being IT consultant served in Delhi, whereas her husband served in Private Defence System Company.
  2. They wanted to reside permanently near Chandigarh by shifting therefrom. Allured by the publication and advertisement of OPs, they booked flat no.7143, 14th floor, tower no.7 in ATS Golf Meadows situated at Barwala Road Derabassi, District SAS Nagar (Punjab) by depositing Rs.7,49,625/-, vide two separate cheques of IDBI Bank.
  3. The total sale price of the unit was Rs.49,97,500/- with additional charges of Rs.50,000/- for maintenance deposit and Rs.One Lakh for power back up.
  4. The booking was confirmed by OPs, vide letter dated 31.05.2013 after issuance of allotment letter by them.
  5. As per clause 14 of the buyers agreement, possession was assured to be handed over to them within 36 months by OPs with further grace period of six months from the date of buyers agreement.
  6. OPs were required to deliver the possession of the allotted unit to them on or before 30.11.2016.  They obtained loan of Rs.39,98,000/- from Housing Development Finance Corporation Limited (HDFC) and a tripartite agreement was accordingly executed on 31.05.2013 between complainants, OPs and HDFC Bank.

Also Read- Ashish Jain v. ATS Estates Pvt. Ltd. – CaseMine

  1. The above said loan amount was released by HDFC Bank in favour of OPs, vide cheque no.920283 dated 19.06.2013. They paid an amount of Rs.47,70,788/- to OPs except the small amount of Rs.3,69,710/- payable at the time of offer of possession of the allotted unit.
  2. The OPs failed to hand over the possession of the allotted unit after completing it.
  3. The complainants cleared the loan amount taken from HDFC Bank. On 25.07.2015, HDFC bank issued no due letter to them.
  4. Complainant no.2 requested OPs to intimate the stage of construction of flat in tower no.7, vide letter dated 28.10.2016. There was no progress on the spot and complainants were in dire need of accommodation.

Also Read- Forum directs developer to cough up ₹65,000 for delay in flat Possession

  1. OPs started paying compensation in the shape of penalty @9500/- per month from January 2017 till August 2018 only, as per penalty clause of buyers agreement and under pressure of letter dated 29.01.2017 and 26.02.2017 by complainants to them.
  2. They have been living in rented accommodation.
  3. They have alleged deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of OPs.
  4. They have prayed that OPs be directed to refund Rs.47,70,788/- deposited by them with interest @15% per annum from the date of their respective deposits till actual payment; further to pay compensation of Rs.Five Lakh for mental harassment; besides to pay Rs.One Lakh as litigation expenses to them.

Also Read- Consumer Complaint Against ATS GOLF MEADOWS

Argument:

Upon notice, OPs filed written reply in the shape of affidavit of Shubhum Gaur, Senior Manager of OPs on the record, alleging the complaint to be not maintainable.

Preliminary objections were raised by them that the clauses of buyers agreement are binding upon the parties and the Forum under C.P. Act has no jurisdiction to direct any modification of the terms of buyers agreement.

This Forum has no territorial jurisdiction to try the complaint, as per clause 35 of buyers agreement.

The Forum at Noida (U.P.) has jurisdiction to decide it.

The complainants are not consumers, as they purchased the units for the purpose of investment only and not for their purpose of self residence.

Also Read- Get Your Money Refunded for Delay in Possession

The complaint is alleged to be barred by time, because the cause of action accrued to complainants on 31.05.2013, when the buyers agreement was executed and the complaint has been filed after more than two years period, which is barred under Section 24-A of the C.P. Act.

There is arbitration clause in the buyers agreement, vide clause 35 thereof and hence the Consumer Forum has no jurisdiction to try the complaint. Clause 14 of buyers agreement is only promissory clause and has no legal obligation upon OPs to deliver the possession within 36 months period from the date of buyers agreement.

The presence of force majeure circumstances automatically lead to extension of time in delivery of possession.

The possession of the allotted unit could not be offered due to force majeure and unseen circumstances in this case on account of non-availability of adequate supply of steel, cement and other building materials, labor and so on.

The time for performance of the agreement between the parties stood extended by Section 63 of Contract Act, 1872.

The complainants are debarred from seeking refund of the amounts, as they have failed to comply with the terms and conditions of the agreement.

The OPs have prayed for dismissal of the complaint by contesting it on merits by denying any deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on their part.

Also Read- Dr. Jaiwant S Cheema vs M/S Ats Estate Private Limited

Case Citation:

Aftab Singh Vs. EMAAR MGF Land Limited and another

EMAAR MGF Land Limited and another Vs. Aftab Singh

National Seeds Corporation Limited Vs. M. Madhusudhan Reddy and another” 2012(2)CLT

Fair Air Engineers (P) Ltd. v. N.K. Modi (1996) 6 SCC 385

Emaar MGF Land Ltd & another Vs. Dyal Singh” 2015(4)CPJ-294

EMAAR MGF Land Limited and another Vs. Dilshad Gill” III(2015)CPJ-329(NC)

Puneet Malhotra & another Vs. Parsvnath Developers Limited

Also Read- Gurpreet Singh Sodhi vs Ats Estates Private Limited

Judgment:

As a result of our above discussion, the complaint is accepted and OPs are directed to refund the entire deposited amounts of complainants with interest @12% per annum from the date of their respective deposits till actual payment by deducting the amount of Rs.1,90,000/- already paid to complainants by OPs in the shape of penalty from January 2017 till August 2018 therefrom. The complainants are also held entitled to compensation of Rs.50,000/- for mental harassment and Rs.20,000/- as cost of litigation to be payable by OPs to the complainants. The above amounts shall be payable by OPs to complainants within 45 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order.

Arguments in this complaint were heard on 11.04.2019 and the order was reserved. The certified copies of the order be communicated to the parties, as per rules.

The complaint could not be decided within the statutory period due to heavy pendency of court cases.

Also Read- Date of Order: 22.09.2021 – RERA Punjab Judgment in ATS Golf Meadows Life Style

For case specific advice, please connect with Top Best Expert Legal Consultants Attorneys in Real Estate/Property Estate/Consumer Court and Consumer Protection Dispute/ Consumer Grievances and Complaints/RERA Lawyers Advocates in Chandigarh Panchkula Mohali Kharar Derabassi Zirakpur etc.

More on 7888356-908.

Call Us