iN 1986 , I paid 30 % (Rs 300/ sq ft)cost as demanded for a flat in Mumbay suburb to the Pvt Ltd developper, but due to many difficulties from their side registration could not be done. Alternatively , in 1991, or the same amount paid , plot was conveyed in my name after stamp duty and registration ; also a construction contract for 1780 sq ft raw house was done and Rs 24,000/.. was paid. After long period of persistance , it was informed in 1999 by the developper that the plot falls under BMC reservation area and equivalant area flat could be provided at 7 storey building coming in the same area , being built by the builder assigned by the developper.
Also , written assurance was given that the rate of Rs300/.. sq ft will not be changed.
After continuous correspondences, (by this time two of three old directors expired and their sons became directors) building started taking shape and in june 2008 , i was given the layout of the flat with old cost calculation and was directed to contact the developper to amend the conveyance etc (original receipt was with them) and make new agreement.
This letter was signed by the only remaining old director in another partnership letterhead with the caption as the successor and assignee of old pvt ltd company. But the other members who were earlier directors refused to handover the possession unless cost is substantially increased. this was refused by me and an advocate notice was sent to the parnership firm andd builder givin copies of all correspondences , conveyance, construction contract etc. Notices were served on the co and builder without any response for almost 8 months.
Meanwhile I learned that the development agrement between the builder and the Pvt Ltd Co(developper) was registered in 2001 based on an MOU drawn up in 1991 and does not mention any obligation of providing flat to me.
I moved the consumer court and the builder(opp no 2) and advocate for intervener( one of the director) appeared and claimed that the company does not exist, and builder has no obligation, and the ex drector acted without informing other members.
In the interim judgement , notiing the absance of opp party no 1 , it was decreed that the opposite party no 1 shall reserve 1768 sq ft area in he same building till rturnable date and dircted the parties to file written statements.
Eventually state commission directed to proceed ex-parte and affidavit of claim (flat or market value) was submitted.
Three times final argument had to be adjourned as file was missing and once file was traced it was found during pagination that the builder had kept his WS in file withot entry in roznama or copy to us . When this wa pointed to the commission , we were directed to write to the builder's advocate to be present at the next hearing.
Now my questions are;
1. As we have no direct lean on the builder , what will be his obligation?
2. As the commission has directed opposite party no 1 (parnership firm who are assignress and successors of the pvt ltd co) to reserve the flat , (oc also is not still given) is it prudent to inform the BMC / sttutory bodies about the restraint ? (My advocate advise to wait)
3. Could you guess about the possible outcome going by your expertise and experience .
