This is a case between individual who booked a flat in an apartment being constructed by developer & builder. The two parties involved are.
“INDIVIDUAL” buyer of the flat. Here in after called as first Party.
AND
DEVELOPERS & BUILDERS. Here in after called as second party.
The case goes like this:
1. That the first party entered into an agreement on 01-Sep-2013 for the purchase of a flat in the apartments of which the second party is the developer & builder.
2. That the first party has already paid 20% of sales deed for the booking of the said flat. The sales agreement was made on 06-Sep-2013.
3. After the sales agreement, second party requested to make some inside alteration to the said flat, without any extra cost, to which the second party agreed.
4. That at the time of the booking of flat and prior to booking of the flat and on many occasions the second party has inform and assured the first party that the apartment is being getting built as per the approved plan from BBMP with minor horizontal deviation. The fourth floor of the apartment will be only used for the purpose of gym and party hall, and there will not be any residential flat on fourth floor.
5. That the BBMP approved plan for the apartment is G+3 (Ground + 3 floors).
6. That on 12-Oct-2013, when the first party visited the site to monitor the progress of construction work. To the utter surprise of the first party, the first party found that the second party has started construction of residential flats (penthouses) on the fourth floor which was not in the original BBMP approved plan for the project.
7. That the first party raised his objection on the construction of unapproved and illegal penthouses, and later also meet in person the managing director (MD) of the second party on 14-Oct-2013.
8. That the MD of second party, tried to convince the first party, by saying that he has got the approval from Govt. to build penthouses, to which first party was not convinced.
9. That the MD of second party also, tried to convince the first party, that he will get the unapproved and illegal penthouses approved by giving bribe to BBMP officials and corporation with some “Akrama-Sakrama” scheme, to which first party has big concern.
10. That the first party has a genuine concern of unapproved and illegal penthouses in the apartment; since the primary reason for first party to buy flat in project was that, “the project is not having any penthouses”, which is getting defeated due to construction of unapproved and illegal penthouse on fourth floor by second party.
11. That the first party will always be in state of fear, of Government legal notifications, actions, penalty or demolition of apartment due to wide deviation from the original BBMP approved plan. Also the penthouse will create burden on limited resources like common area, parking area, lift, water, electricity, sewage etc, which was initially approved only for a total of twenty four (24) residential flats on ground, first, second and third floor.
12. That the first party has a genuine concern, that the property/flat value will not be appreciated due to construction of unapproved and illegal penthouse, and also will be difficult to sell the flat in future if required.
13. That on 26-Oct-2013 first party meets the MD of second party and told their decision to opt-out of the project, and requested to refund of the full amount. A cancelation letter for the said flat was given by first party to second party on 05-Nov-2013.
14. That the second party is refusing to refund the full amount, and is saying that they will refund after huge deduction, deduction amount is not disclosed by second party.
15. That first party feels that it is breach of trust by the second party. Also first party feels that, second party is selling a defective, unapproved and illegal product to first party, and is not what, that was offered and agreed by the second party at the time of booking of the flat.
16. That the first party is looking for two options for the case.
Option-1: Get refund of the full amount with interest and legal expenses from the second party.
Option-2: Stay in the project and go legal way to stop the construction of penthouses.
Kindly provide your advice, how to proceed with this case and how strong the case is in favour of first party.
