IMPORTANT POINT
Cooperative Society can file consumer complaint.

Mrs. M. Shreesha, Presiding Member—For the reasons stated in the Affidavit, delay of two days in filing the First Appeal No. 295/2011 is hereby condoned. Aggrieved by the order of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Maharashtra (in short, the ‘State Commission’), in Consumer Complaint No.09/144, both the Opposite Parties and the Complainant preferred these Cross-Appeals under Section 19 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (in short, ‘the Act’).

By the impugned order, dated 13.06.2011, the State Commission partly allowed the Complaint directing the Opposite Parties, jointly and severally to handover to the Complainant Society, original Deed of Conveyance, property card, original IOD, Commencement Certificate, Occupancy Certificate, Building Completion Certificate, Draft Plan, along with all other necessary documents and Certificates in possession of the Opposite Parties relating to the re-development work carried out by the Opposite Parties and were also directed to submit to the Complainant Society, a Certificate issued either by a competent Government approved Architect or by a concerned officer of Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai, regarding actual FSI consumed by the Opposite Parties while carrying out the re-development work of the Complainant Society Building; together with compensation of Rs. 50,000/- and costs of Rs. 25,000/-; failure to comply with this order within a period of two months, would attract default interest @ 9% p.a., the other claims of the Complainant Society were dismissed.

2. Succinctly put, the facts in brief are that the Building of the Complainant Society was constructed in the year 1964, but subsequently, in the year 2001, they came to know that there was unutilized FSI available on the subject plot and some additional TDR could be purchased from the Open Market for additional construction. By a unanimous decision of the Members of the Society, taken on 15.07.2001, it was decided to entrust the job to M/s. Madhu Builders & Developers and accordingly, a Development Agreement dated 29.08.2001 was executed between both the parties. A Monetary consideration of Rs.1,76,000/- was to be paid to the Complainant Society and renovation of the building was to be completed as per the terms of the Agreement. The first installment of Rs. 51,000/- was paid on execution of the Agreement and the second installment of Rs. 51,000/- was payable at the time the developer applies for Occupancy Certificate, which was not paid and the third installment of Rs. 74,000/- payable after receipt of Occupancy Certificate was also not paid. The Complainant, under RTI learnt that the Occupancy Certificate was granted to the Builder on 14.11.2006, but despite repeated demands, the amounts were not paid. It is stipulated under the Agreement that the Builder was supposed to complete the re-development, within a period of 24 months from the date of issuance of Commencement Certificate. It is averred that the Opposite Parties did not handover the Commencement Certificate and also did not carry out the re-development work within the stipulated time which amounts to deficiency of service and, therefore, seek direction for providing them with all the necessary documents, sanction plan, commencement certificate, occupancy certificate, building plan certificate, etc.

3. It is pleaded that the Builder was under an obligation to demolish the existing garages and provide adequate quantum of parking space to old members as well as to new members but the Builder erected one parking shed and allotted it to the new purchasers for exclusive right of parking space, thereby depriving the original members of the parking space. It is averred that open parking space as well as stilt parking space cannot be sold or allotted by a Builder and, therefore, a direction ought to be issued to the Builder to remove the illegal shed and handover the parking space to the Complainant Society. It is further pleaded by the Complainant So