Case Note & Summary
The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission allowed a consumer complaint filed by Complainant( s) against Opp.Party(s) for deficiency in service regarding allotment of a residential plot in the 'Vatika India Next' housing project. The complainant had applied for a plot on 11.07.2011, paid Rs. 59,98,344 against total consideration of Rs. 1,09,42,078, and was promised possession within 36 months by 08.09.2014. The Opposite Party failed to deliver possession and raised preliminary objections including arbitration clause, complainant not being a consumer, and sale of plot simpliciter being outside the Act's purview. The Commission held that the complainant was a consumer under the Consumer Protection Act 1986, the arbitration clause did not oust its jurisdiction, and there was deficiency in service due to delayed possession. The Opposite Party was directed to refund the amount paid with interest @9% per annum from respective payment dates and pay Rs. 1,00,000 as compensation for mental agony and harassment.
Headnote
The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) held that the allotment of a residential plot in a housing project constitutes 'service' under the Consumer Protection Act 1986 -- The Commission rejected the Opposite Party's contention that the complainant was an investor rather than a consumer -- The arbitration clause in the Plot Buyer Agreement was held not to oust the jurisdiction of the consumer forum -- The Commission found deficiency in service as possession was not delivered within the promised 36 months -- The Opposite Party was directed to refund the amount paid with interest and compensation -- The Commission emphasized that one-sided clauses in builder-buyer agreements favoring the builder are not binding if found to be unfair
Issue of Consideration
Whether the complainant qualifies as a consumer under the Consumer Protection Act 1986 for allotment of a residential plot in a housing project and whether the arbitration clause in the Plot Buyer Agreement ousts the jurisdiction of the consumer forum
Final Decision
The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission allowed the complaint and directed the Opposite Party to refund Rs. 59,98,344 with interest @9% per annum from respective payment dates till realization and pay Rs. 1,00,000 as compensation for mental agony and harassment within 45 days
Law Points
- Consumer Protection Act 1986 applies to allotment of residential plots in housing projects
- Arbitration clauses in builder-buyer agreements cannot oust consumer forum jurisdiction
- Sale of plots in housing projects constitutes service under Consumer Protection Act
- Delay in possession beyond agreed timeframe constitutes deficiency in service
- One-sided clauses in builder-buyer agreements are not binding if unfair
.png)
