Back
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,
MAHARASHTRA, MUMBAI
Consumer Complaint No.CC/16/608
Mr.Vikas Bhika Kale
R/o.S.No.388, Plot no.21, Tapovan Road
Eknath Baug, Behind Swami Tiles
Nasik 422 011 …....Complainant
Versus
Mr.Chinnappa E.V.Gawda
Managing Director
Shrusti Raj Enterprises (India) Ltd.
Plot no.99, Flat no.5, Tilak Nagar
Chembur, Mumbai 400 089 .....Opponents
BEFORE:
D.R.Shirasao, Presiding Judicial Member
PRESENT: Complainant present in person
None present for opponents
ORDER
Per Hon’ble D.R.Shirasao, Presiding Judicial Member
1. Complainant has filed this complaint for getting possession of flat from
opponents along with other reliefs including refund of amount and for getting
damages from opponents. Brief facts of the case are as under:-
Opponents had agreed to sell flat bearing no.B-202 from redeveloped building
no.93 of Safalya Co-op.Hsg.Society Ltd. situated on plot bearing no.CTS 507 of
Village Kirol, Tilak Nagar, MHADA layout, Chembur, Mumbai 400 089 for total
consideration of Rs.26,00,000/-. Opponents had given allotment letter in respect of
that flat in favour of complainant. Complainant had deposited an amount of
Rs.8,00,000/- with opponents on different dates. Although complainant had deposited
this amount with opponents, opponents failed to execute an agreement in respect of
flat in favour of complainant and failed to hand over possession of flat to
complainant. Hence, complainant had given notice in that respect to opponents and
has filed this consumer complaint for getting possession of flat from opponents. It is
also contention of complainant that for payment of this amount he had taken
voluntary retirement from his service from Mumbai Port Trust and because of which
he sustained loss of Rs.7,00,000/- in his pensionary benefits. It is also contention of
complainant that the market price of that flat at the time of filing consumer complaint
is of Rs.90 lakhs and as he has not received possession of that flat, he sustained loss
of Rs.64 lakhs. Complainant has submitted that if opponents are not in a position to
hand over possession of flat to complainant, then opponents be directed to pay an
amount of Rs.8,00,000/- which he has already deposited with opponents and further
to pay damages of Rs.7,00,000/- and Rs.64,00,000/- to complainant along with
interest on that amount. Complainant has also claimed compensation in respect of
mental pain and agony from opponents along with costs of litigation.
2. After admission of consumer complaint, notice was issued to the opponents.
Although notice was duly served on opponents on 02/12/2016, neither opponents
appeared in the proceeding nor contested the same by filing written version on
record. Hence by passing order on 16/01/2017 this Commission proceeded consumer
complaint ex-parte against opponents. Thereafter complainant filed his affidavit of
evidence on record along with documents and written notes of arguments.
3. Heard arguments of complainant. I proceed to decide this consumer complaint
on merits.
4. In this case it is admitted fact that the opponent had agreed to sell flat bearing
no.B-202 from proposed redeveloped building no.93 of Safalya Co-op.Hsg.Society
Ltd. situated on plot bearing no.CTS 507 of Village Kirol, Tilak Nagar, MHADA
layout, Chembur, Mumbai 400 089 for total consideration of Rs.26,00,000/-. In that
respect opponent had issued reservation letter of that flat in favour of complainant on
23/05/2011. Copy of that letter is produced on record. In this case it is admitted fact
that out of total consideration of flat complainant had deposited amount of Rs.8 lakhs
with opponents on different dates. Copies of receipts in that respect are filed on
record. In this case it is admitted fact that although this much amount was paid by
complainant to opponents, op
