STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION MAHARASHTRA, MUMBAI FIRST APPEAL NO.SC/27/FA/738/2017 IN CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO.SC/27/CC/567/2015 Mr. Sanjay Prabhakar Potphode Residing at Matoshree Nivas, Guravali Nijampur, Taluka-Mangaon, …..Appellant/

District- Raigad. (Org. Complainant)

Versus

1. Mr. Abdul Usman alias Abdullah Haji Tahir Jalgaonkar

2. Mr. Kadir Haji Jalgaonkar alias Abdul Kadir

3. Mr. Usman Haji Tahir Jalgaonkar Alias Shaikh Usman Mr. Mustafa Mohammed Sayad Manikware, Attorney Holder of 1 to 3, All represent M/s. Manikware Construction, Moon Complex, Dahivali Road, Village-Morba, Dist. Mangaon, District- Raigad AND Shop No.12, Madar Complex, Bazzar Peth, ….Respondents At Post Shriwardhan -402110, Dist. Raigad & Ors. (Org. Opposite Parties)

BEFORE:

Hon’ble Justice S.P. Tavade, President Hon’ble Vijay C. Premchandani, Member APPEARANCE :

For Appellant : Adv. Sohel E. Kazi For Respondents : Adv. Rahul More a/w Adv. Akshay Deshmukh

ORDER

(Dated 16/02/2026)

Per : Hon’ble Mr. Vijay C. Premchandani, Member

1. The Appellant has filed the present appeal against the impugned order dated 28/09/2016 passed by the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (Now Commission), Raigad District in Consumer Complaint No.CC/567/2015.

FACTS OF THE APPAAL –

2. The Appellant is original Complainant in the original complaint mentioned hereinabove. The Appellant had been residing in the room which later on demolished for the redevelopment purpose and the Respondents as a developer signed and executed the agreement with the Appellant, the Appellant as per that agreement agreed to purchase Room No.103, on 3^rd floor, D Wing in Haji Mohammed Tahir Plaza for the total consideration of Rs.7,05,000/- of the total area of 898.20 Sq.feet. 3. The Appellant agreed to surrender his Tenant right with the clear understanding that the Respondents will construct a new building on the land and allot the new room to the Appellant. The Appellant initially paid Rs.25,000/- to the Respondents as booking amount. The Appellants after signing of the agreement carried out certain changes in the plan and as per the changes plant agreed to sell the flat no.301 in C wing of the total area of 750.60 Sq. Feet for the total consideration of Rs.8,60,000/-. The Appellant agreed for the said changes. The agreement have been registered with the Sub-Registrar office.

4. The Appellant paid Rs.1,97,000/- to the Respondent for the consideration amount towards the flat but the Respondent left the work in the middle only and the constructed the very weak building. The Respondent were agreed to handover the flat on 30^th May, 2014. The Appellant thereafter realize that the Respondents will not complete the project and handover the possession of the flat to him therefore, the Appellant file the complaint before the District Forum Alibaug with the prayers that the directions may be given to the Respondents to handover the possession of the suit property to the Appellant. The Appellant further demanded Rs.50,000/- for the mental agony suffered by him for the deficiency service committed by the Respondents and further prayed to pay 10% interest on the loan amount of Rs.1,97,000/-.

5. The Respondents filed their written statement and denied all the claim, allegations against them, they mentioned that the Appellants and other members filed the complaint in the Govt. Authority, those Govt. Authorities stayed the project.

Both the parties filed their affidavit of evidence with the relevant documents.

6. The matter was argued before the Ld. District Forum who after hearing the matter partially allowed the complaint. The Ld. District Forum held that there is an deficiency of service from the part of the Respondents. The Ld. District Forum ordered the Respondents to start the work of the building within 30 days from getting the order and thereafter handover the possession of the suit property within 90 days. The Appellant directed to pay the remaining amount at the time of taking the possession of the property. T