A developer's failure to form a residential society within the statutory deadline and the imposition of unauthorized maintenance charges, coupled with a housing society continuing to reflect illegal arrears in a member's account, constitutes a continuous deficiency in service and unfair trade practice under consumer law.

JUDGMENT

(Dated : 15/04/2026)

Per – Hon'ble Mr. Mukesh V. Sharma, Presiding Member

1. The Complainant has filed this Consumer Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The Complainant is a 73-year-old pensioner and a bonafide member of the Srishti Building No. 350 Co-operative Housing Society Ltd., Sector-3, Mira Road (East), District Thane. He is the owner of Flat No. 301, 3rd Floor, Building No. 350 in the said Society. The Opponent No. 1 is a builder/developer engaged in the business of construction and sale of residential flats. The Opponent No. 2 is the Society formed in respect of the building developed by the Opponent No. 1.

2. Before proceeding to the facts of the present complaint, it is necessary to note the history of the litigation. The Complainant had earlier filed Consumer Complaint No. 302 of 2017 before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Thane in April 2017. The said complaint was returned on 01.08.2019 purely on the ground of pecuniary jurisdiction. Based on that order, the Complainant filed the present complaint before this Commission on 13.09.2019. Upon filing, the Opponent No. 1 filed a Maintainability Application on 08.12.2022 raising objections of limitation, pecuniary jurisdiction and territorial jurisdiction. The Complainant filed a detailed reply to the said application on 14.06.2023. After hearing both sides at length, this Commission admitted the complaint and passed the order of admission on 07.03.2024. The said admission order was neither challenged nor appealed by either of the Opponents within the period prescribed under the law. However, we have deal with the law points in present order.

Brief facts of the present complaint as stated by the Complainant are as follows –

3. The Complainant booked Flat No. 301, 3rd Floor, Srishti Building No. 350 Co-operative Housing Society Ltd., Sector III, Penkarpada, Mira Road, District Thane admeasuring 76.83 sq. mtrs. (827 sq. ft.) carpet area from the Opponent No. 1 under an Agreement for Sale dated 24.12.2009, duly registered on 05.01.2010 vide Sr. No. TNN 10/130/2010, for a total consideration of Rs. 37,25,290/-. Possession of the said flat was handed over to the Complainant on 01.10.2011. At the time of handing over possession in September 2011, the Opponent No. 1 collected from the Complainant a sum of Rs. 44,460/- (Rupees Forty-Four Thousand Four Hundred and Sixty Only) as an interest-free security deposit towards outgoing charges for one year, which has not been returned to the Complainant till date.

4. The complainant alleged that the Opponent No. 1 was legally bound to apply for registration of the Co-operative Housing Society within four months of the occupation of the flats by its members, i.e., on or before 31.12.2011, as prescribed under Rule 8 of the MOFA Rules. Despite this clear statutory obligation, the Opponent No. 1 failed and neglected to do so, and the Society was eventually registered only on 20.04.2013, i.e., more than sixteen months beyond the prescribed deadline. This delay has never been explained by the Opponent No. 1.

5. It is further submitted the Opponent No. 1 was also obligated under law to hand over the management of the building to the Managing Committee of the duly registered Society within one year of the occupation of flats, i.e., on or before 31.08.2012.