Chandigarh, Jan. 23 -- Merely handing over "fit-out possession" of a flat without obtaining the statutory completion certificate cannot be treated as a valid offer of possession, the Chandigarh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission has ruled in a verdict against Omaxe New Chandigarh Developers Pvt Ltd. The Commission, headed by Justice Raj Shekhar Attri with member Preetinder Singh, passed the order while partly allowing a complaint filed by Ludhiana-based doctors Pankaj Mahindra and Manisha Mahindra against the developer in connection with a residential unit in the project "The Lake" at Mullanpur. The Commission held that a "fit-out possession" letter issued by the developer in March 2024 did not amount to lawful possession, as the mandatory completion certificate had not been obtained. It observed that an occupation certificate and a completion certificate are distinct statutory requirements, both of which must be in place before a builder can legally offer possession to an allottee. The complainants had booked the flat in 2015 under a subvention scheme, with possession contractually due by March 2019. They alleged that despite paying over Rs.68 lakh, construction remained incomplete for years, amenities were unfinished, and the developer stopped paying pre-EMIs to the bank, forcing them to bear the financial burden. They further contended that the so-called possession offered in 2024 was merely on paper and accompanied by illegal monetary demands. In its written reply, Omaxe claimed that the complainants had concealed material facts from the Commission and alleged that, being investors, they did not fall within the definition of "consumer." The developer stated that under the subvention scheme it had already paid Rs.38.2 lakh up to March 10, 2024, as it was liable to pay only till the offer of possession. It further submitted that the occupation certificate was obtained on October 11, 2024, and that the complainants were called several times through letters to execute the sale deed upon payment of the remaining amount, which they failed to do. The developer also pleaded that the Commission could not rewrite or modify the terms and conditions of the agreement and that the delay in delivery of possession occurred due to the complainants' default in making payments. It further relied on a settlement deed dated June 14, 2024, claiming that all disputes had been settled and that neither party would pursue litigation thereafter. Rejecting the developer's defence, the Commission ruled that fit-out permissions merely allow internal works and cannot be construed as a valid or enforceable offer of possession. It underlined that without a completion certificate, possession is "incomplete, illegal and not in conformity with law," relying on multiple judgments of the Supreme Court and the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission. While noting that the settlement deed barred claims relating to delay compensation prior to June 14, 2024, the Commission clarified that the settlement could not legitimise any unlawful offer of possession thereafter. Since the completion certificate was still not on record, the developer continued to be in default even after the settlement, it observed. The Commission directed Omaxe to hand over physical possession of the flat within three months after completing all works, amenities and obtaining the completion certificate. It also ordered the developer to refund pre-EMIs paid by the complainants from their own pocket, continue paying delay compensation at 9% interest for the post-settlement period, and pay Rs.75,000 for mental harassment and Rs.35,000 towards litigation costs....