|     |     |    |    |     |     |  
SCDRC orders Navi Mumbai builder to pay Rs 25 lakh to buyer for 10-year delay
not available
SCDRC orders Navi Mumbai builder to pay Rs 25 lakh to buyer for 10-year delay
Publish on : 2021-05-03 12:35:34
Sanjay and Gulabodevi Singh moved Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in 2017 against Ishaadit Enterprises. The Singh’s had booked the eighth-floor flat at Airoli. MUMBAI: Over a decade after a family from Airoli booked a 350-sq-feet flat in Navi Mumbai but failed to get possession, the state consumer commission recently directed the builder to hand over possession along with total compensation of around Rs 25 lakh. The family had paid Rs 22 lakh for the flat by 2012 besides Rs 8,000 as society formation and electricity charges. The compensation includes 12% interest on the amount paid and another Rs 2 lakh for mental pain and agony. “The complainants could not get possession of the flat from the opponent. They required to knock the doors because of act and inaction of the opponent [builder], hence, it is clear that they have suffered mental agony. Hence, the complainants are entitled for some compensation,” the commission said. Sanjay and Gulabodevi Singh moved Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in 2017 against Ishaadit Enterprises. The Singh’s had booked the eighth-floor flat at Airoli. In the complaint, they submitted that although they had paid the amount, the builder failed to complete construction work, execute the agreement and hand over possession of the flat. They said communications and notices through advocates were exchanged but it was fruitless. They sought the flat and compensation. Along with their complaint, the Singhs submitted copies of the brochure, cost sheet, payment receipts, bank statement, advocate’s notice and communication between the parties. After admission of the consumer’s complaint, a notice was issued to the builder by publishing it in a newspaper. However, no one appeared for the builder. In October, 2017, the court passed an order and said that the complaint should proceed ex-parte. The state commission found that possession was to be handed over in 2011. “Considering the submissions, it has become clear that opponent [builder] has not completed construction work and handed over possession of the flat in dispute to complainants which amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice adopted by the opponents,” it said. The commission said that with the Singhs’ submitting that they were willing to pay the balance, they were entitled to get vacant, peaceful and legal possession of the flat along with occupation certificate after completion of construction work.

@2019 TeamUp. All rights reserved. Site visitors are subject to our Privacy Policy and Terms of use.