Back
RAVI SHANKAR, SUNITA C. BAGEWADI, LADY MEMBER
Riyaz Sohale – Appellant
Versus
Managing Director, M/s. Pathak Constructions – Respondent
ORDER
Sunita C. Bagewadi Member—The complainant filed this complaint against the Opposite Party alleging deficiency in service and unfair Trade Practice and prays to direct the Opposite Party to execute the sale deed and handover the possession of schedule “B’ property or in the alternative to direct the Opposite Party for refund of Rs.33,00,000/- along with interest @l8o/o p.a. from the date of payment till realization and to pay damages of Rs.15,97,000/- along with litigation costs and grant such other relief as deemed fit, in the interest of justice and equity.
2. The brief facts of the complaint is that, the Opposite Party is a developer/builder under the name and style of M/s Pathak Developers Pvt. Ltd. The complainant approached the Opposite Party and attended the meeting held by them and entered into an agreement with the Opposite Party on 10.7.2070. The total consideration of Rs.30,00,000/- in respect of B-schedule property mentioned below and the complainant has paid Rs.5,00,000/- as list installment and later the complainant paid Rs.5,00,000/- as list installment and later the complainant paid periodical payment as agreed. The complainant paid total amount of Rs.28,50,000
Original documents - As per minimum standards of banking procedures, the bank should return the original documents collected from the loan borrower. In case of lost, the bank has to help to take dupl....
Delayed possession of the apartment constitutes deficiency of service under the Consumer Protection Act, entitling the complainant to compensation.
“Non-delivery of subject flat within stipulated time and not giving the complainant till date any assurance with respect to exact date of delivery of possession amount to deficiency in service.”
Failure of Developer to comply with contractual obligation to provide flat to a flat purchaser within a contractually stipulated period amounts to a deficiency.
Deficiency in Service Established – The builder’s failure to hand over the apartment within the contractually agreed timeline, followed by an arbitrary cancellation of the allotment and unjustified f....
(1) Even after more than 4 yrs. from date of agreement, Respondents did not file any document showing that the delay was due to reason which was beyond their control. (2) Respondents did not whisper ....
(1) Plot Buyers Agreement—It is for Opposite Party to prove that Plot was purchased for commercial purpose, by way of some documentary proof.(2) Complainants cannot be expected to wait for indefinite....
(1) Possession – Directing possession of the apartment without the requisite certificates would be inappropriate and not in the interest of justice.(2) National Commission – National Commission deter....
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
