2025 Supreme(Online)(SCDRC) 32322
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
Mr. Manish Nanji Faria – Appellant
Versus
M/s Vaidehi Akash Housing Pvt Ltd – Respondent
SC/27/CC/16/1231
BEFORE THE HON’BLE STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, MAHARASHTRA, MUMBAI CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO.16/1231
1. Mr.Manish Nanji Faria R/o 302, Orchid White CHSL, 10th Road, Khar (W), Mumbai – 400 052. ……Complainant Versus
1. M/s. Vaidehi Akash Housing Pvt. Ltd., Through its Directors
101, Saptarshi CHS Ltd., Behind Madhuban Society, Barfiwala College Lane, D.N. Nagar, Andheri (West), Mumbai – 400 053.
2. Mr.G.S. Phondekar, Managing Director of The Opponent No.1
101, Saptarshi CHS Ltd., Behind Madhuban Society, Barfiwala College Lane, D.N. Nagar, Andheri (West), Mumbai – 400 053.
3. Mrs.Rekha Shinde Director of the Opponent No.1
101, Saptarshi CHS Ltd., Behind Madhuban Society, Barfiwala College Lane, D.N. Nagar, Andheri (West), Mumbai – 400 053.
4. Mrs.Sunita Phondekar, Managing Director of The Opponent No.1
101, Saptarshi CHS Ltd., Behind Madhuban Society, Barfiwala College Lane, D.N. Nagar, Andheri (West), Mumbai – 400 053.
5. Mrs.Madhavi Kerkar, Director of the Opponent No.1
101, Saptarshi CHS Ltd., Behind Madhuban Society, Barfiwala College Lane, D.N. Nagar, Andheri (West), Mumbai – 400 053.
6. M/s. New D. N. Nagar CHSL, Through Chairman/Secretary, Sagar Sahwas Colony, Nr Water Tank, New D.N. Nagar, Andheri (W), Mumbai – 400 053.
7. M/s. Rustomjee Reality Pvt. Ltd., Through its Directors, 702, Nataraj Building, M.V. Road Junction, Off Western Express Highway, Andheri – E, Mumbai – 400 069. …… Opponent Nos.1 to 7 BEFORE:
Justice S.P. Tavade, President A.Z.Khwaja, Judicial Member For Complainants : AdvocateMr.A.S.Vidyarthi alongwith Advocate Mr.Latesh Faria and Adv.Smt.A.Kondlekar For Opponent nos.1 to 5 : Advocate Mr.BaliramKamble For Opponent No.6 : Advocate Mr.Kiran Patil For Opponent No.7 : Advocate Mr.S.B. Prabhavalkar alongwith Advocate Mr.Nilesh Parte
ORDER
(Dated 10/11/2022)
Per:A.Z. Khwaja, Judicial Member
1) Complainant Mr.Manish Nanji Faria has filed present complaint under the provision of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. Brief facts leading to the filing of the complaint may be stated as under –
Complainant Mr.Manish Nanji Faria claims to be resident of Khar (W), Mumbai and was businessman and residing at Orchid White CHSL. Opponent No.1-M/s.Vaidehi Akash Housing Pvt. Ltd., who are Builder and Developers were dealing in the business of construction of houses as well as shops.
Opponent No.2 is Managing Director of opponent No.1 and the other opponents are the Directors. Opponent No.6 is the Co-operative Housing Society, registered under the Maharashtra Co-operative Housing Society Act. Opponent No.7-M/s.Rustomjee Pvt. Ltd. is engaged in the business as Builders and Developers.
2) It is the case of the complainant that opponent no.1 had agreed to redevelop the building which was in dilapidated condition and so had entered into agreement of development with opponent no.6 on 31/12/2005. As per the said agreement the Maharashtra Housing & Area Development Authority had granted No Objection Certificate for the reconstruction of the existing building no.2 to building no.9 after the compliance of all conditions. Bombay Municipal Corporation had also sanctioned the plans for reconstruction of buildings. It is further case of the complainant that in pursuance of the Development Agreement the opponent nos.1 to 5 had issued allotment letter to him on 29/03/2008. As per the allotment letter, Flat No.1802 admeasuring 540 sq.ft. carpet area situated on 18th Floor of the building known as ‘Building No.9’ had come to be allotted to the complainant. Opponent nos.1 to 5 had also executed Agreement for Sale in favour of the complainant and had also assured that the possession of the Flat No.1802 will be handed over to the complainant by the end of April, 2012.But till date the complainant had never received possession nor any refund was made. On the other hand the Opponent no.1 to 5- M/s.Vaidehi Akash Housing Pvt. Ltd. entered into another agreement with opponent no.7 and had assigned all the Development rights in favour of opponent no.7.
3) Co