Skip to main content

Real estate firm directed to pay Rs 4.77 cr for 'huge delay'

A real estate firm has been directed by the apex consumer commission to pay Rs 4.77 crore to seven consumers for "huge delay" in handing over apartments to them noting that the builder had attempted to make profit at the cost of others.

The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission bench presided by Justice J M Malik noted that the apartments booked nine years ago in Greater Noida were yet to be delivered by Unitech Reliable Projects Pvt Ltd and asked it to pay Rs 4,77,58,658 with 18 per cent interest to the seven consumers.

"There is a magic in that little word 'home'. It is a mystic circle and surrounds comforts and virtues, never known beyond its hollowed limits. However, customers are exasperated by senseless delay made by the Builder of a colony," the commission said.

"It must be borne in mind that there is a huge delay in handing over possession of the premises in dispute, i.E., about 9 years. The Opposite Party (builder) has made an attempt to feather its own nest, i.E., to make profits for itself, at the cost of others' expenses. The Opposite Party has utilised the amount for its own purposes," it said.

The commission also directed the firm to pay Rs one lakh each to the complainants for harassment and mental agony.

According to the complainants, in 2006-07, the real-estate firm had advertised for availability of flats in their projects 'Unitech Verve' in Sector Pi-II at Greater Noida in Uttar Pradesh which was scheduled to be delivered within 36 months of signing of allotment letter.

The seven complainants said that they had applied for flats, either individually or jointly, and had paid the money demanded by the builder.

However, after the project got delayed, they filed complaint before the commission in October 2012.

The firm submitted before the commission that it was unable to hand over the possession of apartments to them.

It, however, submitted that it was ready to pay 10 per cent interest to the consumers as per the agreement entered into between the parties.

Article referred: http://www.business-standard.com/article/pti-stories/real-estate-firm-directed-to-pay-rs-4-77-cr-for-huge-delay-115050800990_1.html

Comments

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...

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/

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...