BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SAS NAGAR, MOHALI
Consumer Complaint No.627 of 2014
Date of institution: 03.11.2014
Date of Decision: 05.05.2015
Sahil Ahuja son of Satish Chander Ahuja, resident of Flat No.632, 6th Floor, Tower No.8, SBP South City, Zirakpur.
……..Complainant
Versus
1. SBP South City Promoters & Developers Pvt. Ltd. (Corporate Office), Village Desumajra, Tehsil Kharar, Chandigarh-Kharar Highway, Mohali, Punjab through its Managing Director.
2. Singla Builders & Promoters Ltd. (Corporate Office), Village Desumajra, Tehsil Kharar, Chandigarh-Kharar Highway, Mohali, Punjab through its Managing Director.
………. Opposite Parties
Complaint under Section 12 of the
Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
CORAM
Mrs. Madhu. P. Singh, President.
Shri A.B. Aggarwal, Member.
Present: Shri Sardavinder Goyal, counsel for the complainant.
Opposite Parties ex-parte
(Mrs. Madhu P. Singh, President)
ORDER
The complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 for issuance of following directions to the Opposite Parties (for short ‘the OPs’) to:
(a) pay him compensation to the tune of Rs.2,00,000/- for delayed possession and for providing less area;
(b) pay Rs.1,50,000/- for deficiency in service.
(c) pay Rs.1,00,000/- for mental agony.
(d) pay Rs.10,000/- as litigation expenses.
The complainant has pleaded in the complaint that in the brochure Ex.C-1 the OPs have promised to provide various facilities like covered stilt parking, underground gas pipeline, fountains & water fall, kids play area and jogging park etc. etc. Thus, the complainant booked one flat by depositing the booking amount. Thereafter vide allotment letter dated 29.11.2012 Ex.C-2 flat No.1037, Floor No.10, Tower No.8 was allotted to the complainant at village Bisanpura, VIP Road, Zirakpur for a basic sale price of Rs.27,50,000/-. Agreement to sell Ex.C-3 was also executed between the parties. The payments as per agreed schedule were made by the complainant. The OPs issued letter of possession dated 26.05.2013 Ex.C-4 to the complainant without providing the mandatory basic facilities like electricity, water supply and garbage disposal. The complainant had to survive on the diesel genset used by the builder. The OPs have also not installed the lifts. Even when the lifts were installed they were without backup. No safety measures pertaining to electric wiring has been taken care of by the OPs. The OPs are using the partially operational lifts to carry garbage, waster and other filthy stuff leaving them always dirty and stinking. The OPs have not been able to provide potable water for household purposes. The OPs have also started a new building behind the building where the flat of the complainant is situated which has made his flat a box without any access to air or sunlight. The OPs have not used the promised material for construction as the building has developed cracks and besides this the wooden doors and frames have also developed cracks. The power back up provided is defective. The parking has not been provided as per agreed terms and conditions. The club house, gym, swimming pool, park fountains are not operational. The swimming pool is half built. CCTV cameras and intercom facility have neither been installed nor made operational. The main gate of the project is not properly installed and not in safe condition. The wooden flooring of the flats is too poor. The work of jali doors, kitchen, POP, installation of floor tiles, doors, windows, balconies, kitchen slabs, boxes etc. have not been done in a professional manner. The complainant has many times met various officials of the OPs but nothing has happened till date. The OPs have illegally charged advance amount from the complainant for the purpose of maintenance of the project. The OPs have also not paid to the complainant Rs.5/- per sq. ft. per month due to delayed possession. Non provision of the promised amenities and delayed possession is an act of deficiency in service on the part of the OPs.
2. Notices sent to the OPs through post and as per the report of India post, the notices were delivered to the OPs on 31.12.2014. However, none appeared for them and they were thus proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated 08.01.2015.
3. Evidence of the complainant consists of copies of documents Ex.C-1 to C-8.
4. In view of the decision of Hon’ble Uttrakhand State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in case titled as Consoritum Securities Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. Vs. Smt. Anjana Tyagi, 2013(3) CLT 570 by relying upon the judgment of Hon’ble National Commission in case titled as Mathura Mahto Mistry Vs. Bindeshwar Jha (Dr.) & another, 2008 (I) CLT 566, the OPs was given three opportunities to rebut the evidence of the complainant. However, none appeared for them to rebut the evidence.
5. We have heard learned counsel for the complainant and gone through the written arguments.
6. Admittedly the complainant has purchased the flat from the OPs by paying full consideration of agreed basic sale price of Rs.29,00,000/- as per buyers agreement Ex.C-3. As per Article 4 (a) the possession of the flat was to be handed over to the complainant on or before 30.06.2013. Admittedly the complainant has received the physical possession of flat vide Ex.C-4 dated 04.07.2013 addressed by the OPs to the complainant and, therefore, as per the complainant there is a delay in handing over the possession. Further the complainant has alleged that the flat in question suffers from various defects due to inferior quality of material having been used by the OPs, the building has developed cracks in the walls and wood work and the some of the works have been left incomplete like jali doors, POP, floor tiles, doors and windows, the balconies, kitchen slab, kitchen boxes are either not installed or wherein installed are not in a proper manner causing shabby look to the flat. Further as per the complainant the promised basic amenities and facilities are not provided as the lift installed in the complex are without electricity back up. There is no proper arrangement of electricity, water supply and garbage disposal. The power back up facility is defective. The parking has not been provided as per agreed and promised terms. Therefore, improper/lack of basic amenities and defective construction caused damage to the property of the complainant. So much so the complainant has issued legal notice to the OPs to remove the defects and provide all basic amenities and the same remained unanswered in the hands of the OPs. Hence the complainant has filed the present complaint alleging deficiency in services and praying for removal of defects.
7. To ascertain the period of delay in possession and admissible compensation to the complainant in the event of delay in handing over the possession beyond the agreed time frame as per buyers agreement, certain dates are important to be looked into. As per buyers agreement Ex.C-3 the agreed dated was 30.06.2013 and as per Ex.C-4 the actual physical possession was handed over to the complainant on 04.07.2013. Thus, it is crystal clear that there is no delay in handing over the possession of the property to the complainant and thus the complainant is not entitled to any compensation on this ground.
8. So far usage of inferior quality construction material causing damage to the property of the complainant is concerned; the complainant has not produced any expert evidence in this regard. Mere photographs showing chipping of plaster of the walls or some wood work etc. that too after two years of possession of the property, in our considered opinion, is of no help to the complainant to prove his complaint.
9. Regarding lack of electricity facility, water supply and garbage disposal facilities etc. the complainant has produced some photographs showing loose electricity wires lying on the ground and near the houses in the vicinity, which is definitely a matter of concern. The OPs cannot in any manner put the life and liberty of the residents under threat by leaving the loose naked electricity wires. The act of the OPs in this regard is definitely an act of deficiency in service which needs to be looked into at the top priority by the OPs.
10. For other allegations, the complainant has not adduced any specific evidence i.e. regarding parking, poor/defective back up, no power back up facility in the lifts etc. Therefore, in this regard the bald allegations of the complainant, without supporting evidence are of no help to the complainant.
11. Thus the complaint deserves to be allowed on one count only i.e. causing threat to the life and liberty of the complainant by letting the loose naked electricity wires in the residential complex. Thus, on this account the OPs are found to be negligent in rendering the service to the complainant. Thus, the complaint deserves to be allowed and complainant deserves to be compensated.
12. In view of above discussion, the complaint is partly allowed with the following directions to the OPs to:
(a) to cover the loose naked electricity wires in the residential complex within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.
(b) to pay to the complainant compensation to the tune of Rs.25,000/- (Rs. Twenty five thousand only) for mental agony and harassment including costs of litigation within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.
Certified copies of the order be furnished to the parties forthwith free of cost and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room.
Pronounced.
May 05, 2015.
(Mrs. Madhu P. Singh)
President
(A.B. Aggarwal)
Member
