MAHARASHTRA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES
REDRESSAL COMMISSION, MUMBAI
Hon’ble Mr. Justice M.S. Rane, President &
Mr. V.K. Date, Member
PARISHRAM PROPERTIES PVT. LTD.—Complainant
versus
SEASONS BUILDERS PVT. LTD. & ORS.—Opposite Parties
Complaint Nos. 218, 219 and 220 of 1999—Decided on 25.11.2002
Consumer Protection Act - Flat purchasers - Section 13 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 - Section 2(i)(o) of Consumer Protection Act, 1986
Fact of the Case:
The complainants, flat purchasers, filed complaints against the Builders for failure to hand over possession of the flats or refund the paid amounts. The Builders did not respond to the process issued by the Commission, leading to ex parte proceedings.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the Builders to be deficient under Section 2(i)(o) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, and awarded possession of the flats to the complainants or refund of the paid amounts, along with interest, compensation, and costs.
Issues: Failure of the Builders to fulfill their obligation under the contract and statute, and the entitlement of flat purchasers to compensation for deficiency.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held the Builders/O.P. deficient under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, and awarded possession of the flats or refund of the paid amounts, along with interest, compensation, and costs.
Final Decision: The court directed the Builders to hand over possession of the flats to the complainants or refund the paid amounts, along with interest, compensation, and costs.
Mr. Justice M.S. Rane, President—On request, Mr. A.V. Patwardhan-Advocate assisted us as amicus curiae for and on behalf of the complainants.
2. These matters wherein parties are common i.e. complainants and O.Ps. have been listed on today’s board in the caption of ex parte hearing because of failure on the part of the O.Ps. to respond to the process issued and served upon them by this Commission as required under Section 13 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986. Despite service, O.Ps. did not respond. Under direction of this Commission thrice they were intimated dates of hearing by sending notices on 9.2.2000, 27.3.2000 and 4.5.2000. However there is no response.
This is what on 6.9.2002 when the matter was on our board we have noted.
3. Mr. Shailesh Kumar-Advocate for the complainants. Mr. Sham Dandriya-Secretary of the complainants present. O.Ps. although duly served have remained absent. Affidavit of service has been filed. What is more that this office has intimated the hearing dates to the O.Ps. by sending intimations on 9.2.2000, 27.3.2000 and 4.5.2000. However they have not responded. No appearance or written statement filed. That being so, we direct that matters be proceeded ex parte against the O.Ps. For ex parte hearing matters are adjourned to 24.10.2002.
4. We, therefore, proceed in the matter as directed. (Complainants hereinafter are referred to as “Flat purchasers” and O.Ps. as “Builders”). O.P. No. 1 is a corporate entity registered under Companies Act, 1956 and O.P. Nos. 2 and 3 are described as “Directors”.
5. 3 separate complaints have been filed since 3 different flats were booked by the flat purchasers and for which the Builders agreed to provide.
Few relevant facts :
6. The Builders by their allotment letter dated 2.2.1995 to the flat purchasers initially agreed to provide 8 flats as per particulars mentioned therein for the agreed consideration out of which flat purchasers paid a sum of Rs. 29,92,500/- to the Builders on different dates by cheques, as per particulars mentioned herein below.
Date
Amount
4.2.1995
Rs. 5,60,250/-
25.2.1995
Rs. 10,00,000/-
16.3.1995
Rs. 10,00,000/-
2.7.1996
Rs. 4,32,250/-
Total :
Rs. 29,92,500/-
7. Copy of the allotment letter is at Exhibit A to the complaint followed by execution of Agreement, which is at Exhibit B. 4 receipts evidencing the said payment of the date mentioned above have been tendered. The complainants/flat purchasers have produced the xerox copy thereof and, therefore, original is returned to them which are marked as Exhibit C collectively. Copies of the agreement executed between the parties have also been annexed to the complaints.
8. Correspondence exchanged between the parties also forms part of the Annexure to the complaint including the Advocate’s notice being dated 21.8.1998 served by the flat purchasers upon the Builder.
9. Particulars of claim in each of the complaint have been set out by the complainants in particulars of claim being Exhibit G to the complaint.
C/218/1999
Rs.
10,35,500/-
C/219/1999
Rs.
9,78,500/-0
C/220/1999
Rs.
9,78,500/-
10. In addition, the flat purchasers have also claimed interest, compensation, etc. In each complaint aggregate claims are Rs. 19,93,725/-, Rs. 19,46,990/- and Rs. 19,46,990/- which include interest, etc. claimed by the parties.
11. Flat purchasers/complainants were required to file these complaints because of failure on their part to fulfil their obligation under the contract as also under the Statute to complete the construction of the building as also hand over the possession.
12. Flat purchasers/complainants have also made reference to subsequent understanding arrived at between them wherein amount paid by them mentioned herein above was agreed to be appropriated by providing 3 different flats in respect of which 3 different complaints have been filed.
13. It is to be stated that 3 separate agreements have also been executed at later stage, which forms Annexure to the respective complaints.
14. In the circumstances, complainants/flat p
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.