Delhi State Commission Grants Relief To Homebuyers, Finds K.D.P. Infrastructure Liable For Flat Possession Delay

Brief Facts

The complainants, Reena Aggarwal and Dr. R.S. Gupta, had booked an apartment under the “Grand Savana” project in Ghaziabad floated by M/s K.D.P. Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. (Opposite Party No. 1). The Apartment Buyer Agreement was executed on 24.09.2009, along with a Tripartite Agreement with Axis Bank (Opposite Party No. 2), with a promise to hand over possession within 36 months.

Due to the builder's failure to deliver possession within the stipulated period, the complainants sought a refund through an affidavit dated 08.04.2017 and stopped paying EMIs, surrendering their rights and possession to the bank. However, the builder failed to refund the amount either to the complainants or to the bank.

Aggrieved, the complainants filed a complaint before the State Consumer Commission seeking possession of the flat, refund of loan interest, reimbursement of rent paid, compensation for mental agony and harassment, and litigation costs.

interest, compensation for rent paid, damages for mental agony, and litigation costs.

Arguments By the Parties

The complainants argued that the builder was liable for deficiency in service for failing to deliver possession within 36 months as stipulated in the Apartment Buyer Agreement. They submitted that despite having paid ₹54,21,210/-, the builder neither handed over possession nor refunded the amount, thereby retaining their money wrongfully.

M/s K.D.P. Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. (Opposite Party No. 1) denied all allegations of deficiency in service and argued that the complaint was not maintainable as the Commission lacked territorial and pecuniary jurisdiction. It contended that there was no delay on its part in completing the project, and any delay, if caused, was due to the complainants' default in making timely installment payments. The builder further submitted that the cancellation of the apartment had been carried out after due intimation of the complainants' default.

Axis Bank Ltd. (Opposite Party No. 2) denied all allegations made by the complainants and contended that no cause of action had arisen against it. The Bank submitted that its role was limited to the disbursement of a loan amounting to ₹22,00,000/- in favour of the complainants and that it had no involvement in the construction or delivery of the apartment.

Observations of The Commission

The Commission observed that the Apartment Buyer Agreement was executed between the complainants and M/S K.D.P Infrastructure on 24.09.2009, under which the builder was required to deliver possession within 36 months. It further noted that M/S K.D.P Infrastructure had received a substantial amount of ₹40,62,346/- from the complainants.

The Commission found that the project remained incomplete long after the agreed possession date and held that such delay amounted to a clear breach of contractual obligations. Retaining the complainants' money for an inordinate period without delivering the apartment constituted deficiency in service.

The Commission held M/s K.D.P. Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. liable for deficiency in service due to its failure to hand over possession of the apartment within the stipulated period. The Commission directed M/s K.D.P. Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd to either hand over possession of the apartment by 28.12.2025 or refund ₹40,62,346/- to the complainants with 6% interest, rising to 9% if not paid within two months. It also awarded ₹2,00,000/- for mental agony and ₹50,000/- towards litigation costs.

Case Title: MRS. REENA AGGARWAL vs M/S. K.D.P. INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD, CC/342/2017

Click Here To Read/download The Order