Back
BIBHAS RANJAN DE, MRIDULA ROY
Deb Kumar Biswas – Appellant
Versus
Mukherjee Construction – Respondent
ORDER :
Bibhas Ranjan De, President—This Consumer Complaint has been filed U/S. 35 read with Section 47 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (hereinafter referred to as Act, 2019), alleging deficiency of service and unfair trade practice on the part of Opposite Party No.1 and seeking direction to complete construction of the subject project and to deliver possession of the ‘B’ Schedule Property/Owner’s allocation along with other ancillary reliefs:—
2. The factual background, in brief, is that the Complainant is the absolute owner of the subject land mentioned in the Schedule ‘A’ to the Consumer Complaint. On 03.08.2017, Complainant entered into a Development Agreement with the Opposite Party No.1 for construction of G+4 residential building named “Geetanjali” with certain terms and condition. But the Opposite Party No.1 has failed to complete the construction within the period of 30 months agreed between the parties as per development agreement, thereby attracts deficiency in service within the meaning of Section 2(11) of the Act, 2019. Opposite Party No.1 issued a Cheque bearing No.056766 dated 04.08.2017 to the tune of Rs.7 lacs (Advance payment) which was dishonoured. However, O
:(1) Deficiency in Service – A developer’s failure to complete a project within the stipulated timeframe (30 months) and their default on agreed financial obligations – such as bounced advance cheque....
Valid Possession – Mere completion of structure cannot be said that the Apartment is ready for valid possession.
LAW POINT Global recession – Complainants cannot be made to wait indefinitely for the delivery of possession and the act of the Opposite Party in relying on global recession while retaining the amou....
(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....
(1) Delay - the construction of a residential apartment constitutes a ‘service’ and that the delay in not adhering to the indicated time schedule constitutes deficiency in service.(2) Refund – the de....
“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.”
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
