Back
NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, NEW DELHI
Dr. S.M. Kantikar, Presiding Member and Dinesh Singh, Member
M/s. Country Colonisers Pvt. Ltd. —Appellant
versus
Harmit Singh Arora and Ors. —Respondents
First Appeal No.542 of 2017, First Appeal No.1138 of 2018, First Appeal No.1142 of 2018, First Appeal No.119 of 2019, First Appeal No.1198 of 2017, First Appeal No.1292 of 2017, First Appeal No.1376 of 2018, First Appeal No.1387 of 2017, First Appeal No.1402 of 2017, First Appeal No.1510 of 2018, First Appeal No.1615 of 2018, First Appeal No.1620 of 2018, First Appeal No.1679 of 2017, First Appeal No.1862 of 2018, First Appeal No.1948 of 2017, First Appeal No.1953 of 2018, First Appeal No.1954 of 2017, First Appeal No.2319 of 2017, First Appeal No.26 of 2018, First Appeal No.27
of 2018
Decided on 1.7.2019
Consumer Protection Act, 1986—Sections 2(1)(d) and 21—First Appeal—Deficiency in service and unfair trade practice—Several appeal and cross appeal—Fact and finding of lead case—Residential housing project—Complainant had deposited Rs. 69,62,824/-, which was about 92% of the total cost (Rs. 76,34,250/-)—“Holding Charges” for failure of the buyer to take possession within 30 days of it being offered have not been specified at all and the right to modify and revise them has also been retained by the builder co. with itself—All approvals from concerned government and municipal authorities at the due time, were the responsibility of the builder co—Consumer–complainant was put to loss and injury, put to a continuous position of mental agony and physical harassment, hardship and difficulty, uncertainty and helplessness—Consumer/complainant opted for obtaining a fair amount, comprising of refund of the principal amount paid to the builder co., with interest thereon, lump sum compensation and cost of litigation—In a residential housing project, the rate of interest for house building loan for the corresponding period in a scheduled nationalized bank would be appropriate and logical—Compensation for loss and injury, for mental agony and physical harassment, hardship and difficulty, uncertainty and helplessness, can be neither meagre nor exorbitant, it has to be just and equitable, commensurate with the loss and injury—Cost of litigation of Rs. 1 lakh would be just and appropriate—Once the amount awarded for deficiency in service and/or unfair trade practice is adjudicated and determined, the onus is on the builder co. to be prompt and dutiful in making the necessary payments within the stipulated time—Several directions passed—Held that, respective amount/s deposited by the complainant/s with the builder co. shall be refunded with interest by the builder co. and its Directors as well as its concerned functionaries to the complainant/s, in each case. [Paras 20, 27, 36, 42, 44,
48, 49, 50, 52 and 54]
Result: Appeal allowed.
ORDER
Dinesh Singh, Member—This relates to a home buyer - builder co. dispute.
2. On 03.06.2019, after hearing the learned counsel present and the complainants present in person, and after perusing the material on record, and after the due consideration, we recorded the sum and substance of our considered view in the daily Order:—
Dated: 03-06-2019
Order
Heard the learned counsel for the appellant – builder co. and the learned counsel for the respondents – complainants and the respondents - complainants in - person.
Perused the material on record.
Deficiency in service and unfair trade practice are determined against the appellant – builder co.
The respective principal amount / s deposited by the respondent / s – complainant / s with the appellant – builder co. shall be refunded with interest by the appellant – builder co. to the respondent / s – complainant / s in each case.
The interest shall be payable from the respective date / s of deposit to the actual date / s of realisation.
The rate of interest shall be the rate for house building loan in the corresponding period in a scheduled nationalized bank (take, State Bank of India). If ‘floating’ / varying / different rates of interest were / are prescribed, the higher rate shall be taken for this instant computation.
Lumpsum compensation of Rs. 1 lakh shall be paid by the appellant – builder co. to the respondent /s – complainant / s in each case.
Cost of litigation of Rs. 1 lakh shall be paid by the appellant – builder co. to the respondent / s – complainant / s in each case.
Respective amounts, if any, deposited by the appellant – builder co. with the State Commission shall be adjusted in the above payments with interest, if any, accrued thereon, in each case.
First charge on the awarded amount shall be of the respective bank or financial institution, if any, that has provided loan to the respondent / s – complainant / s towards payment of the respective principal amount / s in each case.
It shall be the responsibility of the appellant – builder co. to correctly ascertain the correct rate of interest as directed and to make the respective payments accompanied with clear and cogent respective calculation sheet / s in each case.
In addition, specifically for indulging in unfair trade practice, the appellant – builder co. is put to stern advice of caution with cost of Rs.25,000/- in each case (i.e. in total 25000 x 20 = Rs.5,00,000/-) to be deposited in the Consumer Legal Aid Account of the State Commission.
All payments shall be made within four weeks of the pronouncement of the reasoned judgment.
It shall be the responsibility of the appellant – builder co. and the respondent / s – complainant / s (both, individually) to inform the respective bank or financial institution, if any, of the reasoned judgment, in each case, within two weeks of the pronouncement of the reasoned judgment.
If the payments to be made by the appellant – builder co. to the respondent / s – complainant / s are delayed beyond the stipulated period of four weeks from the date of the pronouncement of the reasoned judgment, it shall attract higher / penal interest and other compensation / cost (which will be determined by this Commission in the facts and specificities of that contingency if it so arises, in each concerned case).
A copy of the reasoned judgment be sent by the Registry to the State Commission, the appellant – builder co. and the respondent / s – complainant / s in each case within one week of the pronouncement of the reasoned judgment.
The appellant – builder co. shall file a report – in – compliance with the Registry of this Commission within six weeks of the pronouncement of the reasoned judgment with copies thereof to the respective respondent /s – complainant / s in each case.
Reasoned judgment to follow.
Execution in each case shall remain st
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
