WTC Developers Directed To Refund ₹18.90 Lakh For Delay In Possession: Chandigarh Consumer Commission
Pranav B Prem
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-II, U.T. Chandigarh, comprising Mr. Amrinder Singh Sidhu (President) and Mr. Brij Mohan Sharma (Member), has held WTC Chandigarh Development Co. Pvt. Ltd. and WTC Noida Development Co. Pvt. Ltd. liable for deficiency in service for failing to deliver possession of a commercial unit despite receiving substantial payment from the complainants. In its order dated 13 November 2025, the Commission directed the developers to refund ₹18,90,000 along with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of deposit till realization, and further awarded ₹30,000 towards compensation and litigation expenses.
Background
The complainants, Shree Bhagwan Jindal and Mrs. Madhu Jindal, entered into an Agreement dated 12/17.09.2020 with the Opposite Parties for the purchase of Commercial Unit No. 1229 on the 12th Floor of WTC Tower A, Plot No. 2, Aero City, GMADA, Mohali. The unit was purchased for the purpose of earning their livelihood by way of self-employment. Out of the total sale price of ₹37,53,161, the complainants paid ₹18,90,000 on 18.09.2020 via cheque, and the remaining amount was payable within 18 months of application submission or possession, whichever was later. As per the Agreement, the construction completion and possession date was 31.12.2022, but the Opposite Parties failed to deliver the unit or obtain occupation/completion certificates. Photographs produced on record showed that the towers were still under construction. Despite multiple emails seeking refund, the developers did not return the deposited amount, leading the complainants to approach the Consumer Commission alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice.
Stand of the Parties
The complainants contended that the developers had breached the contractual commitment by not completing the project or offering possession within the stipulated period, even after receiving the major portion of the sale consideration. They submitted that the prolonged silence and the failure to respond to refund requests caused mental harassment and financial loss.
The Opposite Parties argued that the possession timeline was linked with the RERA completion schedule and that extensions had been applied for—first up to 30.06.2022, and later to 30.06.2024, which was still under consideration. They further pleaded that delay resulted from COVID-19 related force majeure conditions, including labour shortage and lockdowns, submitting that construction was in progress and possession would be offered soon. Based on this defence, they termed the complaint premature and prayed for dismissal.
Commission's Findings and Decision
Rejecting the defence of the developers, the Commission held that even if a six-month extension due to COVID-19 moratorium is taken into account, the revised completion date would be 30.06.2023, yet possession had not been offered even by the time of adjudication. The Commission noted that the developers failed to produce any documentary evidence showing that RERA had granted an extension of the completion period. The project remained incomplete and no occupancy certificate had been obtained.
Referring to decisions of the National Commission and the Supreme Court, including Pioneer Urban Land & Infrastructure Ltd. v. Govindan Raghavan, the Commission reiterated that unreasonable delay in handing over possession constitutes deficiency in service and entitles the allottee to refund. Since the complainants had not sought possession but refund of the deposited amount, the Commission concluded that they were entitled to repayment along with compensation.
Final Order
The consumer complaint was partly allowed, and the Commission directed the Opposite Parties to:
Refund ₹18,90,000 along with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of deposit until realization; and
Pay ₹30,000 as compensation for harassment and litigation expenses, with compliance to be made within 45 days of receipt of the certified copy of the order.
Cause Title: Shree Bhagwan Jindal & Anr. vs. WTC Chandigarh Development Co. Pvt. Ltd. & Anr.
Case No: DC/AB1/44/CC/521/2023
Coram: Mr. Amrinder Singh Sidhu (President), Mr. Brij Mohan Sharma (Member)
