Maharashtra

StateCommission

A/10/867

MR GOVARDHAN V BANDODKAR - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/S MANGALAM CONSTRUCTION - Opp.Party(s)

A JADHAV

01 Dec 2010

ORDER


BEFORE THE HON'BLE STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL

COMMISSION, MAHARASHTRA, MUMBAI
First Appeal No. A/10/867
(Arisen out of Order Dated 10/03/2010 in Case No. 626/09 of District Thane)
1. MR GOVARDHAN V BANDODKARFLAT NO 10 SHADMIK SOCIETY MANOR PADA NEAR BABUBHAI PETROL PUMP THANE (W)THANE MAHARASHTRA ...........Appellant(s)

Versus
1. M/S MANGALAM CONSTRUCTION ANAND VIEW 1 ST FLOOR L B S MARG NEAR BABUBHAI PETROL PUMP THANE THANE MAHARASHTRA ...........Respondent(s)

BEFORE :
Hon'ble Mr. P.N. Kashalkar PRESIDING MEMBERHon'ble Mr. Dhanraj Khamatkar Member
PRESENT :Mr.A.P. Gogate,Advocate, Proxy for A JADHAV, Advocate for for the Appellant 1 Mr.Manoj Patil, Advocate for the Respondent 1

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.

ORDER

Per Mr.P.N. Kashalkar, Hon’ble Presiding Judicial Member

This appeal is filed by the org. complainants, whose complaint was partly allowed and O.P./respondent has been directed to pay a sum of `5 Lakhs with interest @ 15% p.a. from 01/09/2006 and also directed to pay cost of `5,000/- and further compensation of `5,000/- towards mental agony.  Not satisfied with the order passed by the Forum below in their favour, org. complainants have filed this appeal.

The facts lie in narrow compass.

Complainants-husband and wife had filed consumer complaint against M/s.Mangalam Construction of Thane (West).  According to the complainants, they had booked flat No.501 on 5th floor for total consideration of `5 Lakhs.  They have paid `5 Lakhs by cheque on 19/08/2006.  Receipt was issued in their favour along with agreement of sale.  However, it was found by the complainants that O.P. was avoiding to make construction as per agreement.  Even, O.P. further asked the complainants to pay consideration at the enhanced rate of `7,000/- per sq.ft.  Even by that time, Municipal Corporation had not sanctioned plan for construction of 5th floor of the said building.  Therefore, complainants demanded back the amount of `5 Lakhs with interest @ 21% p.a.  Since their demand was not made despite notice sent through their lawyer, they filed consumer complaint claiming refund of `5 Lakhs with interest @ 24% p.a. since 19/08/2006 till realization.  They also sought compensation of `5 Lakhs and cost of `5,000/-.  They also claimed `25,000/- towards litigation expenses.

O.P. was duly served with the notice by the Forum below.  O.P. did not remain present, did not file written version to contest the matter.  Forum below proceeded ex-parte against the O.P. by passing order to that effect on 02/12/2009 and on considering the documents and affidavits placed on record, Forum below was pleased to pass the above order as mentioned in the opening Para of this judgement.  Aggrieved by the inadequate releifs granted, complainants have filed this appeal.  The main contention of the appellants is for refund of `5 Lakhs with 24% p.a. which builder was to charge, in case flat purchaser delays payment of installment.

Upon hearing both the parties, we are finding that the order passed by the Forum below is very reasonable, just and proper.  The amount is directed to be refunded to the complainants with interest @ 15% p.a.  In fact under the Maharashtra Ownership of Flats Act, 1963, the amount is normally refunded with interest @ 9% p.a., but Forum below has granted interest @ 15% p.a.  Besides that, Forum below has also directed payment of `5,000/- towards cost and `5,000/- as compensation for mental harassment.  Said order in our view, in the circumstances, is appearing to be just, proper and it does not call for any interference.  We therefore find no substance in the appeal preferred by the org. complainants.  We therefore 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.

 

PRONOUNCED :
Dated : 01 December 2010

[Hon'ble Mr. P.N. Kashalkar]PRESIDING MEMBER[Hon'ble Mr. Dhanraj Khamatkar]Member