Skip to main content

Builder to pay woman 2 lakh for delay in handing over flat

The state consumer commission has penalised a builder for failing to hand over the possession of a ready flat booked by a Dombivli resident four years ago, despite receiving a substantial part of the payment.

The Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission has directed Aditi Land & Infrastructure Developers to pay Pushpa Mehta a compensation of Rs2 lakh for not giving her the Ghatkopar flat, even though she had paid Rs32 lakh of the Rs35 lakh due to them.

The commission has given the developer two months to hand over the 675-sq ft flat, failing which the developer will have to shell out an additional penalty of Rs1,000 a day.

Pushpa and her late husband Jayantilal had booked the flat In July 2009. The developer executed a sale deed after they paid a booking amount of Rs12 lakh. The couple then got a home loan from the Zoroastrian Co-operative Bank, which advanced them Rs13 lakh, credited directly to the developer’s account.

They also got insurance for the flat and, by August 2011, had paid Rs1.01 lakh towards its premium.

Over the years, the couple continued to pay bank loan installments of Rs26,106 a month.

The final Rs3 lakh was to be paid to the developers when they were given possession.

In August 2011, the couple approached the state commission after the developer failed to hand over possession of the ready flat by January 2011, as stipulated in the sale deed.

The developer contested the complaint saying they had never refused to hand over the flat and said they would do so after the construction work was done and all the necessary certificates from the civic authorities had been obtained.

The developer further contended that the couple had not paid the entire amount, and sought dismissal of the complaint.

The consumer commission, however, dismissed the developer’s contentions.

“This complaint is the best example of how builders exploit prospective purchasers,” the commission said.

The state commission held the developer guilty of deficiency in service and directed them to pay Rs2 lakh to Mehta towards compensation for mental agony for the delay and Rs25,000 towards the cost of the litigation.

Article referred: http://www.hindustantimes.com/India-news/Mumbai/Builder-to-pay-woman-2-lakh-for-delay-in-handing-over-flat/Article1-1104447.aspx

Comments

Post a Comment

Most viewed this month

Partition proceedings are vitiated even if single co-sharer is not made party or is not served in accordance with law

Cause Title :  Bhagwant Singh vs  Financial Commissioner (Appeals) Punjab, Chandigarh,  CWP-2132-2018 (O&M), High Court Of Punjab & Haryana At Chandigarh Date of Judgment/Order : 31.08.2022 Corum : Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sudhir Mittal Background A large parcel of land was owned by the Nagar Panchayat. Thereafter, some of the co-sharers sold their shares to third parties including the petitioners herein. On 22.11.1995, respondents No.3 to 5 filed an application for partition of the land. The petitioners were not impleaded as parties.  On completion of proceedings, sanad was issued on 28.08.1996. Vide two separate sale deeds dated 28.05.2008 respondents No.3 and 5 sold some portion in favour of respondent No.6 and 7. These respondents sought implementation of the sanad resulting in issuance of warrants of possession dated 05.06.2008. Allegedly, it was then that the petitioners realized that joint land had been partitioned and that proceedings h...
Post a Comment
Read more

Power of Attorney holder can also file cheque bounce cases: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has held that a criminal complaint in a cheque bounce case can be filed and pursued by a person who holds a power of attorney (PoA) on behalf of the complainant. A three-judge bench headed by Chief Justice P Sathasivam gave the "authoritative" pronouncement on the issue, referred to it by a division bench in view of conflicting judgements of some high courts and the apex court. "We are of the view that the power of attorney holder may be allowed to file, appear and depose for the purpose of issue of process for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (which deals with cheque bounce cases)," the bench, also comprising justices Ranjana Prakash Desai and Ranjan Gogoi, said. The bench, in its judgement, said, "...we clarify the position and answer the questions in the following manner: "Filing of complaint petition under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act through PoA holder is perfectly legal...
1 comment
Read more

Christian who reconverts as Hindu SC will get quota benefits

Amid the controversy over “ghar wapsi”, the Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that a person who “reconverts” from Christianity to Hinduism shall be entitled to reservation benefits if his forefathers belonged to a Scheduled Caste and the community accepts him after “reconversion”. Citing articles by B R Ambedkar and James Massey, and reports by Mandal Commission and Chinappa Commission, the court said: “There has been detailed study to indicate the Scheduled Caste persons belonging to Hindu religion, who had embraced Christianity with some kind of hope or aspiration, have remained socially, educationally and economically backward.” The bench of Justices Dipak Misra and V Gopala Gowda held that a person shall not be deprived of reservation benefits if he decides to “reconvert” to Hinduism and adopts the caste that his forefathers originally belonged to just because he was born to Christian parents or has a Christian spouse. Expanding the scope of a previous Constitution benc...
1 comment
Read more