Complainant through Lrd. Adv. Sant
Opponent No. 1 & 2 through Lrd. Adv. Wakankar
Opponent No. 3 through Lrd. Adv. Deshmukh
*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*--*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*--
Per : Mr. V. P. Utpat, President Place : PUNE
// J U D G M E N T //
(04/01/2014)
This complaint is filed by the consumer against Builder and Pune Municipal Corporation for deficiency in service under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The brief facts are as follows,
1] The complainant has purchased flat from the opponent no. 2, which is a construction company and opponent no. 3 is Pune Municipal Corporation. At the time of delivery of possession, the completion certificate was not issued. Conveyance was not executed. Parking area was encroached by the opponent no. 1 by reducing common area. The access road is closed. The opponent no. 3 allowed to occupy the flats without issuing completion certificate. These are the deficiencies caused to the complainant; hence he has filed this complaint for removal of defects and for declaration of deficiency in service as well as for compensation.
2] The opponent no. 1 and 2 resisted the complaint by filing written version. It is the case of the opponents that the possession of the flat is delivered on 30/9/2005 and the complaint is filed in the year 2009 and hence it s time barred. The possession of the flat was delivered, as the complainant was insisting for possession before obtaining completion certificate. The opponents have contended that an Association of Apartment will be formed after completion of the building in all respect. The opponents have prayed for the dismissal of the complaint.
3] The opponent no. 3 has contended that the notice is not issued to the Corporation before filing the complaint; hence the complaint is not maintainable. It is the duty of the builder to apply for the completion certificate through licensed Architect/Engineer with full compliance. The opponent no. 3 has denied that it has levied tax in respect of disputed property. It has prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
4] After scrutinizing the documentary evidence, which is produced before this Forum, hearing the arguments of both the counsels and considering pleadings, the following points arise for determination. The points, findings and the reasons thereon are as follows-
Sr.No. | POINTS | FINDINGS |
1. | Whether complainant has proved deficiency in service by the opponents? | Proved against opponent no. 1 and 2 |
2. | What order? | Complaint is partly allowed against opponent no. 1 and 2 |
REASONS :-
5] The undisputed facts in the present proceeding are that the complainant had purchased flat from the opponent no. 2 under as registered agreement. It reveals from the pleadings that the opponent no. 1 and 2 have not obtained completion certificate, not formed society or Apartment and not executed the conveyance deed. These are the obligations put on the builder under Maharashtra Ownership Flat Act. In such circumstances, inference can be drawn that the opponent no. 1 and 2 have caused deficiency in service.
6] It is alleged by the complainant that, the opponent no. 3 is also responsible for deficiency in service, as it is collecting taxes without issuing completion certificate. It is the case of the opponent no. 3 that, it is the duty of the builder to apply for completion certificate through licensed Architect. The opponent no. 1 and 2 have not complied the provisions of Maharashtra Ownership Flat Act by applying to opponent no. 3 for completion certificate. It further reveals from the pleading of the opponent no. 1 and 2 that, they are going to form Apartment after completing the entire project and thereafter they will obtain completion certificate and execute conveyance deed. It is the duty of the builder to obtain completion certificate and form society or Apartment as well as execute conveyance deed. These compliances are not made by the builder; hence this Forum is of the opinion that the opponent no. 1 and 2 have caused deficiency in service. Rest of the reliefs, such as removal of encroachment and restraining the opponents from making changes in the sanctioned plan, are not within the jurisdiction of Consumer Forum. Hence, these reliefs can not be granted by this Forum. In the result, we answer the points accordingly and pass the following order.
** ORDER **
1. Complaint is partly allowed.
2. It is hereby declared that the opponent
No. 1 and 2 have caused deficiency in
service by not providing completion
certificate, forming Society/Apartment
and by not executing conveyance deed.
3. The opponent no. 1 and 2 are directed
to provide completion certificate, form
Co-operative Society or Apartment and
execute conveyance deed within 6 weeks
from the date of receipt of this order.
4. The opponent Nos. 1 and 2 are directed
to pay jointly and severally an amount
of Rs. 5,000/- (Rs. Five Thousand only)
towards compensation for deficiency in
service, mental and physical sufferings
and cost of the litigation, to the
complainant, within six weeks from
the date of receipt of this order.
5. Complaint stands dismissed against
Opponent no.3.
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.
Place – Pune
Date- 04/01/2014
