SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(CONSUMER) 55

CONSUMER
Mr.Sunil Sadanand Vaiti C/o. Mr.Ashish Patankar – Appellant
Versus
M/s.Sterling Constructions (Through its Partners Sameer Ziaudddin Khan & Sarosh Khan) – Respondent
EXECUTION APPLICATION NO. SC/27/EA/17/130



##PAGE1##

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION MAHARASHTRA EXECUTION APPLICATION NO. SC/27/EA/17/130 IN SC/27/CC/13/349

1. Mr.Sunil Sadanand Vaiti C/o. Mr.Ashish Patankar Building No.4, Flat No.203, Green Acres Phase II Ghodbunder Road, Kavesar, Thane – 400 607

2. Mrs.Kirti Sunil Vaiti C/o. Mr.Ashish Patankar Building No.4, Flat No.203, Green Acres Phase II Ghodbunder Road, Kavesar, Thane – 400 607 ……..Applicants/org.complainants Versus

1. M/s.Sterling Constructions (Through its Partners Sameer Ziaudddin Khan &

Sarosh Khan)

212/213, Building No.5 Shree Mahalaxmi Industrial Premises CHS Jogani Complex, V.N.Purav Marg Sion-Chunabhatti, Mumbai 400 022

2.Mr. Sameer Ziaudddin Khan (partner of M/s.Sterling Constructions)

212/213, Building No.5 Shree Mahalaxmi Industrial Premises CHS Jogani Complex, V.N.Purav Marg Sion-Chunabhatti, Mumbai 400 022

3.Mr.Sarosh Khan (partner of M/s.Sterling Constructions)

212/213, Building No.5 Shree Mahalaxmi Industrial Premises CHS Jogani Complex, V.N.Purav Marg Sion-Chunabhatti, Mumbai 400 022 ….Respondents/org.OPs BEFORE: Justice S.P.Tavade – President Vijay C.Premchandani – Member PRESENT: Advocate Ajay Pawar for applicant.

##PAGE2##

Advocate Sajira Jondhale i/b. Advocate U.B.Wavikar along with Advocate Baliram Kamble for respondents.

FINAL ORDER (Dt. 06/08/2026)

Per Hon’ble Vijay C.Premchandani – Member

1. The present execution application is filed by the applicants (original complainants) u/sec.27 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 for non-compliance of the order passed by this Commission in Consumer Complaint no.349/2013 (CC/15/349).

Facts of the application:-

2. The applicants contended that in the original complaint following impugned order is passed:-

1. Consumer complaint is partly allowed with costs quantified at Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) payable to the complainants by the opponents.

2. Opponents are guilty of deficiency in service for not handing over possession of the flat to the complainants.

3. Opponents are directed to complete the construction of said flat No.A- 701, 7th floor, admeasuring 537 sq.ft. carpet area in the residential project “Sterling Apartments” at Survey No.292(Part), CTS No.406- 1A(pt.), 407 and 407-1 of village Kurla of Mumbai Suburban District in all respects and obtain occupancy certificate and building completion certificate and hand over possession to the complainants within four months from the date of payment of remaining consideration i.e. Rs.14,50,000/- plus Rs.25,000/- as deposit for payment of expenses and Rs.25,000/- as deposit for payment towards share money and entrance fee [Total : Rs.15,00,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Lakhs only)]. If the opponents refused to accept the amount, then complainants should deposit the amount in this Commission under intimation to the opponents and from that date within four months possession should be handed over to the complainants.

##PAGE3##

4. Opponents are further directed to pay interest @ 21% p.a. on the amount of Rs.16,50,000/- (Rupees Sixteen Lakhs Fifty Thousand only) from the date of filing of complaint i.e. 30/08/2013 till handing over possession of the said flat to the complainants.

5. Opponents are also directed to pay Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) as compensation on account of physical and mental harassment suffered by the complainants.

3. The applicants contended in the application that the respondent/accused has not complied the order. Therefore, the present Execution Application is filed.

4. The applicants have prayed that the accused may be dealt and punished according to the provisions of section 27 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986.

5. The present application was verified and the process was issued against the accused u/sec.27 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986. The accused appeared. The plea of the accused is recorded. The accused has pleaded not guilty of the offence alleged against them.

6. The complainants filed their evidence by way of affidavit in examination in chief and the accused took

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top