Skip to main content

Supreme Court orders builder to repay Rs 33 crore maintenance fees

Dealing a blow to builders who don't deliver on promises, the Supreme Court has asked a developer in Gurgaon to refund residents Rs 33.38 crore — 70% of the maintenance fees it had collected since 2002 - for failing to provide the amenities it had committed to at the time of purchase.

A bench of Justices V Gopala Gowda and Adarsh Kumar Goel on Friday upheld a March 19 ruling of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) directing the developers of Ambience Lagoon Apartments to refund 70% of the total maintenance money collected over 11 years to 345 flat owners for failing to offer services commensurate with the maintenance charged.

There are 15 blocks in Ambience Lagoon Apartments, located behind Ambience Mall on NH8. At the time of allotment of flats, the buyers were promised one lift for every 10 flats. But in most blocks, only two lifts were provided instead of the four promised.

In November 2004, 66 residents of Ambience Lagoon moved court against Raj Singh Gehlot and his company, Ambience Pvt Ltd, for poor maintenance of lifts. The case dragged on, and finally, on March 19 this year, the NCDRC passed its judgment.

But the company moved the Supreme Court where it was represented by top-flight lawyer Abhishek Manu Singhvi. The residents were represented by Kamini Jaiswal.

Depending on the size of the flat, each resident will now get back anything between Rs 6 lakh and Rs 15 lakh.

Article referred: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/business/india-business/No-retrospective-effect-of-new-capital-gains-tax-rules/articleshow/41565536.cms

Comments

Post a Comment

Most viewed this month

Michigan House Approves 'Right-to-Work' Bill

Amid raucous protests, the Republican-led Michigan House approved a contentious right-to-work bill on  Dec 11 limiting unions' strength in the state where the (Union for American Auto Workers)  UAW was born. The chamber passed a measure dealing with public-sector workers 58-51 as protesters shouted "shame on you" from the gallery and huge crowds of union backers massed in the state Capitol halls and on the grounds. Backers said a right-to-work law would bring more jobs to Michigan and give workers freedom. Critics said it would drive down wages and benefits. The right-to-work movement has been growing in the country since Wisconsin fought a similar battle with unions over two years ago. Michigan would become the 24th state to enact right-to-work provisions, and passage of the legislation would deal a stunning blow to the power of organized labor in the United States. Wisconsin Republicans in 2011 passed laws severely restricting the power of public s...
Post a Comment
Read more

Power to re-assess by AO and disclosure of material facts

In AVTEC Limited v. DCIT, the division of the Delhi High Court held that AO is bound to look at the litigation history of the assessee and cannot expect the assessee to inform him.  In the instant case, the Petitioner, engaged in the business of manufacturing and selling of automobiles, power trains and power shift transmissions along with their components, approached the High Court challenging the re-assessment order passed against them. For the year 2006-07, the Petitioner entered into a Business Transfer Agreement with Hindustan Motors Ltd, as per which, the Petitioner took over the business from HML.  While filing income tax return for the said year, the petitioner claimed the expenses incurred in respect of professional and legal charges for the purpose of taking over of the business from HML as capital expenses and claimed depreciation. Article referred: http://www.taxscan.in/assessing-officer-bound-look-litigation-history-assessee-delhi-hc-read-order/8087/
Post a Comment
Read more

The recovery of vehicles by the financier not an offence - SC

Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 8907  of 2009 Anup Sarmah (Petitioner) Vs Bhola Nath Sharma & Ors.(Respondents) The petitioner submitted that  respondents-financer had forcibly taken away the vehicle financed by them and  illegally deprived the petitioner from its lawful possession  and  thus,  committed  a crime. The complaint filed by the petitioner had been  entertained  by  the Judicial Magistrate (Ist Class), Gauhati (Assam) in Complaint Case  No.  608 of 2009, even directing the interim custody of the vehicle (Maruti  Zen)  be given to the petitioner vide order dated  17.3.2009.  The respondent on approaching the Guwahati High  Court against this order, the hon'ble court squashed the criminal  proceedings  pending   before  the  learned Magistrate. After hearing both sides, the Hon'ble Supreme Court decided on 30th...
7 comments
Read more