Back
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
MAHARASHTRA, CIRCUIT BENCH AT PUNE
APPEAL NO. A/2020/617
(Arisen out of order dated 14/10/2020 passed in complaint
No.CC/17/34 by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission,
Pune)
1. Shri. Balkrishna Narayan Bhujbal
2. Mrs. Anita BalkrishnaBhujbal
Both R/at – Survey No. 60/B,
B.T. Kawade Road, Dalvi Nagar,
GhorpadiGaon, Pune – 1 ...... Appellants
Vs.
Raviraj, Kothari Punjabi Associates
The Joint Venture
Office at S. No. 67A/3, Ghorpadi,
Pune
Through its Members
1. Shri. RavindrakumarNaupatlalSakala
Resident of 614, Nana Peth,
Pune – 411002
2. Shri. RamniklalChampalal Kothari
Resident of – 322/19, Phule Colony,
ShankarsethPeth Road,
Pune – 411042
3. Shri. Sunder Udharam Punjabi
Resident of – S. No 255, Akshay Villa,
Flat No. 112, 1st Floor, Baner Road,
Aundh, Pune – 411007 ...... Respondents
BEFORE: Hon’ble Dr. S. K. Kakade, Presiding Member
For the Appellants : AdvocateShri. Amod Kumar
For the Respondents : Advocate Shri. AbhijitHartalkar
ORDER
(22/10/2021)
Per Dr. S. K. Kakade, Presiding Member
[1]
Being aggrieved by the order dated 14/10/2020 in consumer
complaint no. CC/2017/34 passed by learned District Consumer Disputes
[A/2020/617]
2
Redressal Commission, Pune dismissing the complaint; the present appeal
has been preferred by the original complainants. The facts necessary for
deciding the appeal can be stated as under :-
[2] The original opponents are the members of joint venture firm namely
Raviraj Kothari Punjabi Associates which had the absolute right by virtue of
agreement dated 01/09/2000 to develop the land bearing survey number
51/1/6, 51/1/7, 51/1/8, 67A/3, 67A/10B, 68/7, 68/8 and 68/9
administering 4 hectares 0.46 Aar, situated at Ghorpadi within the limits of
Pune Municipal Corporation and decided to construct the ownership flats on
the said land and to sell the same to the prospective purchasers. Hence,
complainant approached the opponents to purchase a flat. Accordingly
complainants entered into an agreement with the opponents in respect of
flat number 4, first floor of building number E-1, admeasuring 78.03
sq.mtrs. along with terrace admeasuring 3.71 sq. mtrs. on 24/01/2002,
which was duly registered before sub registrar. The total consideration of
flat was agreed Rs. 7,84,000/-. As per the said agreement the construction
of the building was to be completed by the end of May, 2002. The
complainants paid total amount of Rs. 5,38,000/- to the opponents out of
the total consideration from time to time and for this purpose complainants
had availed housing loan from ICICI home finance and Rs. 2,46,000/- was
the balance consideration. According to the complainants, they found
several works of flat and common amenities were incomplete therefore they
requested the opponents to complete the same before taking balance
consideration but the opponents insisted for making payment of balance
consideration. As the complainants took some time to arrange the amount,
[A/2020/617]
3
the opponents refused to receive the balance amount and hand over the
possession of the flat to the complainants. The complainants further stated
that, opponents never communicated
the complainants about the
cancellation of the agreement dated 24/01/2002. The complainants came
to know that the opponents are selling the said flat to Mr. Madhukar
Gandhale & Sunanda Gandhale and the loan agreement between ICICI Bank
and Mr. Madhukar Gandhale & Sunanda Gandhale was signed on
13/11/2003 in respect of
