Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(SCDRC) 2993
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
Mr. Rajesh K. Arya, Member, Mr. Preetinder Singh, Member
Hira Singh Thakur and Shyama Thakur – Appellant
Versus
Manohar Infrastructure & Constructions Pvt. Ltd. – Respondent
Consumer Complaint No. SC/4/CC/22/2024
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Vishal Satija
For the Respondents: Samridhi Goyal, (proxy for Sh. Anil Mehta)
Possession of housing units without completion and occupational certificates constitutes a deficiency in service, qualifying under unfair contracts per the Consumer Protection Act, mandating compensation for affected consumers.
Headnote:(A) Consumer Protection Act, 2019 - Section 47 - Complaint against unfair trade practice and deficiency in service - Complainants filed a complaint for housing unit possession without necessary certificates and basic facilities - The complainants were charged unreasonable maintenance fees despite deficiencies in service - The opposite parties failed to provide legally valid possession as per terms of the buyer's agreement. (Paras 12, 19-22, 29, 35)
(B) Unfair Contracts - Definition and implications of one-sided buyer agreements - Complainants asserted agreement terms favored the developer and imposed unreasonable charges - As per Section 2(46), such acts constitute 'unfair contracts' under CPA 2019. (Paras 12, 16, 34)
Facts of the case:
The complainants booked a unit in a residential project but faced delays, lack of legal possession, absence of required completion and occupation certificates, and inadequate facilities - They sought various reliefs, including compensation for mental distress and waiver of undue charges.
Findings of Court:
The court determined that possession given lacked validity, and ordered the opposite parties to secure necessary certificates while also compensating the complainants for deficiencies and unfair practices.
Issues: The court addressed whether the possession offered was legal and valid, and whether the terms of the agreement represented an unfair contract.
Ratio Decidendi: The court asserted that failure to obtain necessary occupation and completion certificates invalidated the possession offered - Unreasonable contract terms that disadvantage the complainants constituted unfair practices - Aligning with established consumer protection principles, the complainants were entitled to compensation.
Result: The court partly accepted the complaint, directing required actions from opposite parties and awarding compensation for the complainants.
PER RAJESH K. ARYA, PRESIDING MEMBER
Brief facts:-
It is the case of the complainants that the complainants showed their interest for allotment of a house with the opposite parties, who allotted an independent floor, measuring 1560 sq. ft., in their project namely “THE PALMS”, New Chandigarh for total sale consideration of 65,50,440/-. However, no allotment was issued despite various requests. Buyers Agreement was executed between the parties on 21.03.2018 for Unit No.606 SF measuring 1560 sq. ft. in the aforesaid project. The opposite parties confirmed receipt of the above amount in the conveyance deed, which was got executed on 27.03.2018. It has been stated that the opposite parties gave physical possession of the flat, without possession letter and without obtaining the completion and occupational certificate from the competent authority, which is in contravention of settled proposition of law that the possession cannot be handed over without obtaining these certificates. The complainants have also alleged that the most of the terms and conditions of the buyers agreement are one sided and totally favoring the opposite parties and against their interest. It has further been stated that the conditions of the draft maintenance agreement, signed by the complainant on 21.03.2018 alongwith the buyers agreement, are also one sided and final maintenance agreement has not been executed till date. It has further been stated that there is no independent arrangement for power backup and the backup provided by the opposite parties is linked to PSPCL meters installed in the common area of the buildings. It has further been stated that there is no water meter installed and no water treatment plant exists as such, the water facility is not proper.
2] It has further been stated that the complainant’s unit is a corner flat as mentioned in the conveyance deed i.e. towards the north, there is the unit of the complainants; towards the south, there is 40 feet road; towards the east, there is again 40 feet road and towards the west, there is Floor No.629. It has further been stated that the opposite parties with malafide intentions have left open the iron bars towards the south side and when the complainants approached the opposite parties to remove those iron bars, they kept the matter pending on one pretext or the other. It has further been stated that due to dew and rain, the iron bars have caught rust, which might have affected the building as well. It has further been stated that now the opposite parties have started constructing another building right after the road and the complainants have strong assumption and presumption that they are planning to cover the road by joining the building towards south side of the unit. The complainants also placed on record inspection report dated 02.02.2024 of Block A of the Housing Project ‘The Palm’ Manohar Singh Infra & Co., Sector 3, New Chandigarh, Mullanpur, Mohali (Punjab), Annexure C-8, where the flat of the complainants is located, which they got prepared from Kamti Architects + Designers, showing various deficiencies and lack of basic amenities.
3] It has further been stated that opposite party No.6 – Effective Faclility Management Private Limited has been raising illegal demands vide their invoices on monthly basis as there is no agreement executed between the complainants and opposite party No.6. It has further been stated that the condition of the flat in question and the project is very poor as shown in photographs, Annexure C-6 (Colly.).
4] It has further been stated that not only the basic amenities as stated in the Brochure are not available but there is no one to look after the surroundings of the area as there is no proper security at the site. It has further been stated that the opposite parties have delivered the possession of the unit in jungle without obtaining the requisite completion certificate and permissions/approvals from the competent authority.
Relief sought by the complainants:-
