This is a classic case of cheating by builders, conspiracy by BMC and apathy of courts towards the suffering citizens. Can somebody tell me what is the remedy?
My friend was a tenant in a building. Builder entered consent terrms with him agreeing to give alternative accommodation and a garage under the stilts within 6 months from the date of filing. A plan of garage was attached to the Consent terms. Stamp duty on the Consent terrms was payable by the builder.
After completion of construction, somewhere in 2002, the flat promised was handed over. However, for next 6 months the garage was not delivered. So he wrote to the buider. The builder sent a copy of letter by his architect addressed to the BMC applying for the garage. Therefore my friend wrote to BMC for position of approval which [in absence of the RTI Act those days] was not replied by BMC.
Thereafter, after about an year, the builder handed over the possession of the garage with a letter of handing over. Thus all that was due from the builder appeared to have been complied with in or around 2004. The garage was assessed to tax and was in use eversince.
In year 2010, one another tenant, objected to the garage saying it was unauthorized. My friend showed the society the letter received from builder which the society rejected and asked to show BMC permission. Therefore my friend wrote to the builder for the copy of permission. Builder write back saying that now that the property was handed over to the society, he had no connection with it. He asked to approach the society for documentation.
When the decree was applied it was revealed that the builder had nnot paid the stamp duty on the Consent terms which was to be paid by the builder as per the consent terms.
As advised, my friend filed a contempt petition before the Bombay High Court at Mumbai. But the court was of the view that there was a delay in filing and the wording in the conset terms read as "will deliver a garage complying with the municipal rules and also shall apply for the permission" Court was of view that there is no evidence produced that the garage was not compliant with the rules and in petitioners own version the application was made to BMC. So there is no violation of undertakings given to the court and hence no contempt could be seen. The advocate did not argue in any manner before the court but advised my friend to withdraw the petition.
I do not understand how handing over a garage without permission was complying with the consent terms. Is it proper to overlook the right of a consumer to get premises complete with permission? Is every sale of premises required to spell that the parmission will be granted, numbered, entered in the outward register, signed , sealed, despatched, received, delivered, etc?
My friend wend to BMC and asked for the file. He was told that the file was not traceable. When he applied under the RTI Act, same reply was received. After filing appeal, the file surfaced. Only a selected papers were transfered to a different folder and were shown as the file. Still it revealed the remark of the Asst Engr "discussed with the party and he advised no need to reply" on the letter addressed BMC asking the status of the permission.
My friend tried to talk to people to regulate the garage at his own cost. The stakes told to him were as much as 1.5 lakhs. Legal remedy is proved useless.
This is the plight of the citizens in India. Can anybody suggest an effective mean to achieve the goal?
