GMADA to refund money to two Allottees over delay in possession.
It seems that GMADA has not been able to keep its promises since the date of announcement of Purab Premium Apartments scheme. Be it consumer courts or petition in high court the complaints are being filed on regular basis on the matter pertaining to Purab Premium Apartments.
Allured by the salient features of housing scheme advertised by GMADA, viz Purab Premium Apartments and The petitioners being successful in draw of lots, the petitioner was allotted an apartment in Purab Premium Apartments Scheme-1, Sector 88, SAS Nagar,Mohali. Letter of intent was issued on May 22,2012.
It is pertinent to mention that, clause III of letter of intent stipulates as follows:
“…Ownership and Possession.
(II). Possession of apartments shall be handed over the completion of development works at site in a period of 36 months from date of issuance of letter of intent. In case for any reason, the authority the authority is unable to deliver the possession, the allottees shall have right to withdraw from scheme by moving an application to estate officer, in which case, the authority shall refund the entire amount deposited by applicant alongwith 8 % p.a compounded annually….”
In the present case, the Punjab and Haryana high court has directed GMADA to refund the amount deposited by two allottees of 2012 in sector 88 over delay in flat possession.
One of the allottees, Asheesh Aggarwal whose case was discussed to deliver the judgment, had applied for a Type 2 flat amounting to a sum Rs.55 lakh. The petitioner applied withdrawal from scheme in July 2016. GMADA had told him he would have to let go 10 % of consideration amount. It was letter of intent that had been challenged in high court under article 226 in 2018. Under article 226 a writ petition can be filed before any High Court within whose jurisdiction the cause of action arises, The High Court may grant a writ for the enforcement of fundamental rights or for any other purpose such as violation of any statutory duties by a statutory authority.
The High court has observed that possession was to be delivered on the completion of development works within 36 months. The court observed that petitioner complied with letter of intent and GMADA was at fault in not offering the possession within stipulated period.
For case specific advice one can connect with top/best/expert Punjab Haryana Chandigarh State Consumer Redressal Commission Lawyer Advocate Practicing in Chandigarh Panchkula Mohali.
For more info connect- 99888-17966.