STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, MAHARASHTRA, MUMBAI Consumer Complaint No. 877 of 2017 Mr. Deepak Motiram Chhabria an Indian inhabitant having his residential address at Flat No.4, B Wing Second Floor, Indira Apartment, Opp. State Bank of India, Dattapada Road, Borivali (East), Mumbai – 400 066. ..... Complainant Versus

1. Neel Kamal Realtors Suburban Pvt. Ltd.

A company incorporated under the Provisions of the Companies Act, 1956, Having its registered office at D.B. House, Gen A.K. Vaidya Marg, Goregaon (East), Mumbai – 400 063.

2. Mr. Vinod Goenka, Director, having the Office at D B House, Gen A K Vaidya Marg, Goregaon (East), Mumbai – 400 063.

3. Mr. Ashok Mahavirprasad Saraf, Director, having his office at D B House, Gen A K Vaidya Marg, Goregaon (East), Mumbai – 400 063.

4. Mrs. Shilpa Vipin Saboo, Company Secretary, having her office at D B House, Gen A K Vaidya Marg, Goregaon (East), Mumbai – 400 063. .... Opposite Party BEFORE:

Hon’ble Mr. Mukesh V. Sharma, Presiding Member Hon’ble Ms. Poonam V. Maharshi, Member PRESENT:

For the Complainant : Advocate S. Hussain For Opposite Party : Advocate Anil Galgali, Advocate Pramod Purav

JUDGMENT

(13-05-2025)

Per: Hon’ble Mukesh V. Sharma, Presiding Member

1. The complainant, Mr. Deepak Motiram Chhabria, has filed the present complaint under Section 17 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practices on the part of Opposite Parties No. 1 to 4 in relation to a flat booked in their residential project originally known as “Orchid Ozone” (later renamed as “DB Ozone”), situated at Mira Road (East), District Thane. Opposite Party No. 1, M/s. Neelkamal Realtors Suburban Pvt. Ltd., is the developer and promoter of the said project. Opposite Parties No. 2 and 3 are Directors of Opposite Party No. 1, actively involved in the execution and management of the project. Opposite Party No. 4 was functioning as the Company Secretary of Opposite Party No. 1 at the relevant time.

2. The complainant resides and works in Bangkok and has authorised Mr. Pravin J. Yadav to represent him before this Commission through a duly executed Special Power of Attorney dated 08/06/2017.

3. The complainant stated that being attracted by the Opposite Parties’ representation, brochures, and verbal assurance of timely possession and world-class amenities, he booked Flat No. 1601 on the 16th Floor of Building No. 1 in the said project on 02/01/2010. 4. The total consideration for the flat, inclusive of car parking, was ₹36,26,184/-, of which the complainant initially paid ₹6,95,236/, and thereafter made subsequent payments from time to time. By February 2016, the complainant had paid a total amount of ₹34,42,238/-, covering nearly 95% of the total price. An allotment letter was issued on the same date confirming the said booking.

5. The complainant has alleged that despite having received almost the entire consideration amount, the Opposite Parties failed to execute and register the Agreement for Sale. Only after continuous follow-up, in 2016, the Opposite Parties issued a draft agreement which, to the complainant’s shock, included additional charges amounting to ₹7,83,000/- under the heads of “Development Charges” and “Infrastructure Costs” as per Clause

34 of the draft.

6. The complainant alleged that these charges were never disclosed at the time of booking and were arbitrary in nature. He pointed out that his brother, Mr. Rajesh M. Chhabria, had also booked a similar flat—Flat No. 1602, situated on the same 16th floor of Building No. 1 in the same project—on the same date as the complainant.

7. It is further alleged that in his brother’s case, a registered agreement was executed by the Opposite Parties wherein the “Development Charges” and “Infrastructure Costs” were clearly specified as ₹13,120/- and ₹21,950/- respectively. In contrast, the draft agreement issued to the complainant in 2016 sought to impose a lump sum of ₹7,83,000/- under similar heads without any jus