A person who purchases a flat from a builder is a consumer as defined in the Consumer Protection Act.

Mr. Justice R.N. Mittal, President—Briefly, the facts of the case are that M/s Ansal Properties and Industries (P) Ltd., New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as 'the Builder') advertised in the newspapers for the sale of commercial offices/flats etc. in its shopping complex known as Bhikaji Cama Place @ Rs. 1,25,000/- per flat. Defendant No. 1 is the Chairman/Managing Director of the said Company. Defendant No. 2 is the Estate Manager, Star Estates Management (P) Ltd., defendant No. 3 the Executive Engineer, Delhi Electric Supply Undertaking and defendant No. 4 the Municipal Corporation of Delhi.

2. The complainant in March' 81 booked a flat bearing number 148 in 6-Bhikaji Cama Place Building, by depositing Rs. 15,000/- as initial payment through the builders' agent S.P. Bhatia of Zenith Estates. He was further liable to pay rupees one lac only on account of the balance price. It is pleaded that subsequently instead of charging rupees one lac, the builder required the complainant to pay Rs. 2,15,356.12/- and he had to deposit the same. It is further pleaded that this act of the builder amounts to unfair trade practice and cheating on their part. The complainant was also required to sign another agreement illegally by the builder on 30.4.88 when he had deposited Rs. 2,09,911.00/-, in which many conditions of sale were changed by them unilaterally.

3. It is next pleaded that the builder further cheated the complainant by giving him area measuring 108 sq. feet as against 166 sq. feet as promised earlier. Thus the price of the 58 sq. feet which was given short @ Rs. 1,150/- per sq. feet comes to Rs. 67,700/-. The flat, it is averred is unserviceable and unusable as it is too small.

4. The builder had declared a special discount of 5% initially, but the complainant was given 2% discount and he is entitled to additional 3% discount which comes to Rs. 69,680/-. The complainant has pointed out various defects in the flat and claimed refund of certain amounts on account of those defects. He has also pointed out several imperfections and short comings in the quality and workmanship of the flat and performances of service. He claimed the followed reliefs against defendant No. 1:

1. That the builder be directed to give a good quality flat measuring 155 sq. feet without any pillar for an amount of Rs. 1.25 lakhs only to him.

2. That the builder be directed to purchase the defective flat at the current prevalent market rate from him.

3. That the builder be directed to pay to the complainant an amount of Rs. 5,42,040.00/- on account of various defects pointed out by him.

5. The complainant further claimed that defendant Nos. 1 & 2 be directed not to charge any transfer fee or maintenance charges from him. Against defendant No. 4 he prayed that they be directed to decide the representation of the complainant against the assessment orders dated 31.12.86 and 8.3.88 in terms of the directions of the Supreme Court Judgment reported as AIR 1985 Supreme Court 339 and refund the excess house-tax charged by them. Against DESU defendant No. 3, he prayed that the electric bills issued by them be cancelled, as the bills were illegal and they be restrained from sending any future bills to him.

6. Respondent No. 2 has been proceeded against ex part Respondents No. 1, 3 & 4 contested the claim of the complainant. Defendant No. 1 in their written statement pleaded that the complainant was not a consumer as defined in Consumer Protection Act and consequently the complaint was not maintainable. They also denied the allegations of the complainant on merits. Defendant No. 3 denied the claim of the complainant and pleaded that he applied for electric connection in the second week of June' 88 and the connection was energised on 22nd July' 88 against connection No. 1260528. The first bill of Rs. 128/- was raised against him in October' 88 on the basis of minimum charges. Further bills in the months of March, June, August and December' 89 were also raised on minimu