LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

Raj Kumar Makkad (Adv P & H High Court Chandigarh)     01 December 2012

Builder told to hand over flats, pay rs 7 lakh to man

MUMBAI: The Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission ruled in favour of a man who had dragged a builder to court for not giving him possession of the two flats he had booked in 2006.

M/s Rockline Constructions Company has been directed to handover the flats at Millat Nagar in Andheri (W) to Yusuf Ismail Agwan and pay him around Rs 7.2 lakh as compensation towards interest on the booking amount, mental agony caused and the cost of the complaints.

In February 2006, Agwan booked two flats, each measuring 769 sq ft in carpet area. Each flat was to cost Rs 42 lakh. Agwan paid Rs 13 lakh by cheque as 15% payment for each of the flats and received allotment letters four months later.

In the complaint filed in 2010, Agwan alleged that though the construction was progressing very slowly, he believed in the builder's reputation. He was told that he would have to pay the installments as per the levels of construction. However, Agwan received no such intimation. In February 2008, he received a letter stating that the construction had stopped because of legal problems. Agwan was then given the choice to collect the amount paid by him, together with statutory interest. But Agwan decided to continue with the project and waited for the builder to complete the construction. When the builder did not do so, he repeatedly contacted Rockline. The builder then sent him a letter, stating he had no legal rights.

Aggrieved, Agwan filed two complaints in the commission.

The builder contended that Agwan had not made further payments. Rockline also submitted that it had cancelled the booking in February 2008 and told Agwan to take back the amount, but he did not do so and filed false and frivolous complaints to extract money.

Agwan submitted the allotment letter and some other documents. The commission held the letter sent to Agwan was not a cancellation letter but an option to either continue with the project or withdraw by taking back his money. The commission said there was a clear-cut case of deficiency in service.



Learning

 1 Replies

V R SHROFF (Sr. ADVOCATE Bombay High Court Mob: 9892432152)     02 December 2012

Very informative. 

To fight against builder's lobby in Mumbai is very difficult task. 

 

his jusdwment will be eye opener for builders, as many innocent flat purchaser lost their money, and builders sel the same flats at double the price. , making money. 

Thanks


Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register