Maharashtra

Pune

cc/2009/93

H.J.Ghode - Complainant(s)

Versus

Sankalp Const. - Opp.Party(s)

W.T.Koli

05 Jun 2014

ORDER

PUNE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM
PUNE
Shri V. P. Utpat, PRESIDENT
Shri M. N. Patankar, MEMBER
Smt. K. B. Kulkarni, MEMBER
 
Complaint Case No. cc/2009/93
 
1. H.J.Ghode
Dhanori Pune 15
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'ABLE MR. V. P. UTPAT PRESIDENT
 HON'ABLE MR. M. N. Patankar MEMBER
 HON'ABLE MRS. Kshitija Kulkarni MEMBER
 
For the Complainant:
For the Opp. Party:
ORDER

Complainant through Lrd. Adv.  

Opponent through Lrd. Adv. Deshmukh

 

 

Per : Shri. Mohan N. Patankar, Member

                                           J U D G M E N T

                                          05/06/2014                                                                   

          The present complaint is filed by the consumer against the construction company for deficiency in service under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.  The brief facts are as follows,

 

1]       Complainant is resident of Dhanori, Pune – 15.  The opponent no. 1 is the construction company and opponent no. 2 and 3 are its partners, having office at Kothrud, Pune.  The complainant has booked one residential flat admeasuring 480 sq. ft. in a project to be constructed by the opponent.  The total cost of the flat decided is Rs. 2.80 lacs.  An agreement deed was registered on 12/10/2004 before Sub-Registrar, Haveli No. 28.  The complainant had so far made a payment of Rs. 1.80 lacs to the opponent.  The construction of the project commenced but stopped the work.  On enquiry, the opponents gave false reasoning, but assured to complete the construction.  In March 2008, the opponent started demanding more amount to the complainant.  Complainant send a notice to the opponent on 12/3/2008 asking about the completion of the flat.  The complainant send a notice to the opponent on 12/3/2008 stating that he is ready to make full payment and requested to complete the construction and hand over the possession of the flat.  On 20/11/2008, the opponent sent a letter to complainant stating that, there is a breach of conditions of the agreement dated 12/10/2004, hence the agreement is terminated and the complainant shall take back the amount paid to him.  Hence, the complainant has filed present complaint and claimed for completion and possession of his flat booked with the opponent. 

 

2]      Opponent no. 1 to 3 do not appeared till 06/08/2009.  Thereafter opponent appeared and submitted application for setting aside ex-parte order and written statement.  The opponents denied the contents of the complaint.  It reveals from the record that the complainant had so far paid Rs. 1.80 lacs towards the cost of his booked flat for Rs. 2.8 lacs.  The opponent states that the due payments were not made timely, hence the progress of the construction suffered, resulting opponent one sided termination of the agreement dated 12/10/2004.

 

3]      After going through the pleadings of the complainant and the opponents, scrutinizing relevant documents and arguments of both the parties following points arise for the determination of the Forum.  The points, findings and the reasons thereon are as follows,

 

 

Sr.No.

   

            POINTS

 

FINDINGS

1.

Whether there is deficiency in service by the opponents?

Yes.

2.

Whether opponents are responsible for deficiency in service?

Yes/

3.

What order?

Complaint is partly allowed.

  

 

REASONS    :-

 

4]       The undisputed fact is relation of consumer and service provider between both the parties is established.  The complainant after paying amount to the opponents in lieu of purchase of flat in the housing society being constructed by the opponents, by registering an agreement, has become consumer of the opponents.  The complainant had paid an amount of Rs. 1,80,000/- to the opponents.  The amount is considerable.  The agreement was made in the year 2004.  The complainant is willing to pay balance payment.  There is inordinate delay in completing the flat and handing over its lawful possession to the complainant.  It is the considered opinion of the Forum that the opponents had failed in providing assured service to the complainant.  Therefore in the result, this Forum answer the points accordingly and pass the following order.

 

                                      O R D E R

 

  1. Complaint is partly allowed against the

Opponent no. 1 to 3.

 

  1. It is hereby declared that the opponents

have caused deficiency in service by not

completing the construction and handing over legal possession to the complainant.

 

  1. Complainant is directed to pay balance

amount to the opponent no. 1 within month from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

 

  1. Opponents are directed to complete  the

construction and hand over legal possession of the flat to the complainant within two months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

 

  1. Opponents are further directed to pay

an amount of Rs. 20,000/- for mental and physical sufferings as well as cost of the litigation within two months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

 

6.       Copies of this order be furnished to

the parties free of cost.

 

 

7.       Parties  are directed to collect the sets, which were provided for Members within one month from the date of order, otherwise those will be destroyed. 

 

 

 

 

 
 
[HON'ABLE MR. V. P. UTPAT]
PRESIDENT
 
[HON'ABLE MR. M. N. Patankar]
MEMBER
 
[HON'ABLE MRS. Kshitija Kulkarni]
MEMBER

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.