Per Shri S.R. Khanzode, Hon’ble Presiding Judicial Member This appeal takes an exception to the impugned order dated 27/02/2009 passed in consumer complaint No.90/2008, Smt.Dayadevi Krishnadev Pandey & Anr. V/s. M/s.J.P. Builders and Developers, by Addl. District Consumer Forum, Thane. This is a consumer complaint against the builder filed by the flat purchasers. It is not disputed that as per the agreement dated 08/02/2006 flat purchased by the appellants/org. complainants was handed over to them by the builder on 02/02/2007. It is a flat situated in Airoli area of Navi Mumbai on 5th floor having area of 692sq.ft. Thereafter, taking issue as to the leakage and other deficiencies, consumer complaint was filed. Forum below relying upon the local inspection carried out through the Architect Mr.Jagdish Ramchandra Sabnis held that the appellants/complainants are the consumers and further, granted relief of repairs as per the report of architect Mr.Sabnis and also awarded `15,000/- as compensation towards mental torture and `5,000/- as costs. Builder did not prefer any appeal against the said order as submitted at the Bar before us. However, not satisfied with the reliefs granted, org. complainants preferred this appeal. We heard Mr.Mohit Bhansali, Advocate for the appellants and Ms.Falguni Thakkar, Advocate for the respondent. After carefully examining the submissions made on behalf of both the parties and the material placed on record, except bare statement on oath filing affidavit of Smt.Dayadevi Pandey and filing documents as per list dated 05/05/2008, no evidence is adduced as per Section 13(4) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 on behalf of the appellants. Mere production of documents containing xerox copies of photographs and xerox copy of inspection report of M/s.Sawant Constructions, nothing has been produced and these documents are also not tendered in evidence as per Section 13(4) of Consumer Protection Act, 1986. Thus, virtually, except affidavit of that complainant, no other evidence is adduced on behalf of the complainants to substantiate their grievances. In these backgrounds, merely relying upon the report submitted by the Architect, Forum below granted reliefs, supra, for repairs, etc. It is tried to be canvassed before us that the report of M/s.Sawant Constructions may be considered. We are unable to accept this contention on two counts. Firstly, there is only xerox copy of report of M/s.Sawant Constructions, besides that there is no affidavit of Mr.Govind Sawant, Proprietor of M/s.Sawant Constructions. Thus, what has been awarded by the Forum below is much more than what should have been awarded by the Forum below as far as relief of repairs is concerned. As such, there is no case of enhancement of compensation granted for the repairs. Coming to the other reliefs granted, namely, compensation, complainants claimed `1 Lakh on the ground of mental harassment. However, complainants miserably failed to substantiate such claim. Therefore, what has been granted by the Forum below i.e. `15,000/- on that count, cannot be faulted with and, certainly, it is not a case for enhancement. Thus, finding the appeal devoid of any substance, we pass the following order :- -: ORDER :- 1. Appeal stands dismissed. 2. No order as to costs. 3. Copies of the order be furnished to the parties. |
