SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
S. Saghir Ahmad & D.P. Wadhwa, JJ.
TULIP PARK CO-OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LTD.—Appellant
versus
M/S. SAI OVERSEAS IMPORT & EXPORT—Respondent
Civil Appeal No. 13417 of 1996—Decided on 14.9.1999
CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, 1986 - SECTION 2(1)(G), 2(1)(O) - HOUSING CONSTRUCTION - DEFICIENCY IN SERVICE - SHORTFALL IN SALEABLE AREA - INTERPRETATION OF AGREEMENT - NO DISPUTE ON SALEABLE AREA - NO DEFICIENCY IN SERVICE.
Fact of the Case:
A cooperative housing society (complainant) entered into an agreement with a builder (respondent) for the construction and sale of 64 flats in a building called Tulip Park. The agreement specified a total saleable area of 34,361 sq. ft. at a rate of Rs. 630/- per sq. ft. However, the actual saleable area constructed was only 29,788.34 sq. ft., resulting in a shortfall of 4,572.66 sq. ft. The complainant claimed a refund of Rs. 28,80,776/- for the shortfall.
Finding of the Court:
The National Commission rejected the complainant's claim, holding that there was no deficiency in service provided by the respondent. The court found that the building was constructed as per the sanctioned plan and each flat had the area as specified in the agreement. The court also noted that the complainant had agreed not to raise any dispute regarding the saleable area.
Issues: Whether there was a deficiency in service provided by the respondent in the housing construction.
Ratio Decidendi: The court interpreted the agreement between the parties and found that the respondent had agreed to construct a building with a total saleable area of 34,361 sq. ft. However, the court also found that the complainant had agreed not to raise any dispute regarding the saleable area. The court held that, considering these factors and the fact that the building was constructed as per the sanctioned plan, there was no deficiency in service provided by the respondent.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the appeal and upheld the order of the National Commission.
D.P. Wadhwa, J.—Appellant was Complainant before the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (for short ‘National Commission’). Proceedings were initiated under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, under which National Commission has been constituted to entertain complaints where value of the goods or services and compensation, if any, claimed exceeds Rs. 20 lacs. National Commission is also an Appellate Authority. It hears the appeals from orders of the State Commission.
2. The complainant, a co-operative housing society, had complained short-fall in services rendered by the respondent, a builder and developer, which had agreed to construct and sell 64 flats to the complainant in a building called Tulip Park. The complainant is not happy with the order dated June 21,1996 of the National Commission in one aspect and it is that while under the agreement dated May 10, 1990 respondent had agreed to construct the flats having total saleable area measuring 34,361 sq. ft. at the rate of Rs. 630/- per sq. ft. but the saleable area actually measured comes to 29,788.34 sq. ft. There being thus short-fall of 4,572.66 sq. ft. in the constructed area. Since complainant had paid the price for the area of 34,361 sq. ft. and it got only 29,788.34 sq. ft. It claimed refund from the respondent of an amount of Rs. 28,80,776/- (4,572,66 sq. ft. x Rs. 630/- per sq. ft.). The National Commission did pot agree with the complainant. In this appeal by the complainant we are called upon to decide on, what the appellant says, if there is any deficiency in services provided by the respondent, the builder.
3. Under Clause (g) of Section 2(1) of the Act, “deficiency” means “any fault, imperfection, shortcoming or inadequacy in the quality, nature, and manner of performance which is required to be maintained by or under any law for the time being in force or has been undertaken to be performed by a person in pursuance of a contract or otherwise in relation to any service”. A complaint lies if there is deficiency in service of housing construction. “Service” under Clause (o) of Section 2(1) means service of housing construction as well. Grievance of the complainant is that the respondent failed to give 34361 sq. ft. of area in the building Tulip Park in accordance with the terms of the contract and that less area was given. When this fact was brought to the notice of the respondent it took the stand for the first time that there was a mistake and it had forgotten to include the stilt area in the agreement and claimed that the complainant had to pay for the stilt area. There is no ground floor as the building is constructed on stilts. Price of land is included in the cost of construction calculated at the rate of Rs. 630/- per sq. ft. Actual total saleable area given was 29,788.34 sq. ft. and thus there was the shortfall of the actual area. The respondent was liable to return the amount for the shortfall of this area aggregating to Rs. 28,776/-.
4. We may at this stage refer to some of the terms of the agreement, alleged breach of which led the complainant to approach the National Commission. The agreement recites as to how the respondent, as developer, became entitled to sell the land and the building constructed thereon. Respondent was to construct the building as per sanctioned plan granted by the Bombay Municipal Corporation. As per the sanctioned plan respondent was required to construct 64 flats in two wings ‘A’ and ‘B’, wing ‘A’ has seven floors with four flats on each floor totaling 28 flats. Wing ‘B’ has six floors with six flats on each floor totaling 36 flats. With the agreement a plan was annexed showing the flats on each floor of both the wings giving sq. ft. area of the flat. The plan, however, does not show the area of the common places. Agreement specifically records the declaration of the builder that the building is sanctioned for development and construction as per the sanctioned plan granted by the Bombay Municipal Corporation.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.