Per Shri Dhanraj Khamatkar, Hon’ble Member

          This appeal takes an exception to an order passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Mumbai Suburban dated 07/06/2004 in consumer complaint No.170/1998.

2.       The facts leading to this appeal can be summerised as under :-

          The complainant/appellant had purchased a flat No.6 admeasuring 600 sq.ft. on 2^nd floor in “Omkar Apartments” Pailipad, Trombay, Mumbai under the Agreement of Sale dated 24/04/1994 for consideration of `3,84,000/-.  The complainant alleged that he had pointed out defects and details of poor quality of construction to the opponent vide his letter dated 16/11/1994.  The complainant further alleged that though the construction was not completed in all respects he was put in possession by opponent around December 1994 and opponent assured him that he will complete all the incomplete work.  However, despite of repeated requests the opponent failed to rectify the defects in the flat, to form a society of the flat purchasers, to obtain Occupation Certificate, short supply of water, providing a garden.  As there was no Occupation Certificate, the complainant had to pay penal assessment.  Even though the complainant had issued a legal notice, opponent has not taken any cognizance.  Hence, the complainant filed consumer complaint claiming rectification of defects, occupation certificate, adequate water supply and compensation of `2,50,000/-. 

3.       The opponent contested the complaint stating that on 16/09/1996 there was compromise between the parties and hence, the complaint is not maintainable.  The opponent further contended that the complainants have deliberately defaulted in payment of municipal tax, water charges, maintenance charges and other outgoings.  The opponent further contended that the construction is not of a poor quality and the complainants had occupied the flat despite of the fact that the construction was incomplete.  He further contended that he had completed the construction of the building and obtained completion certificate on 27/06/1996.  He further contended that as there is a dispute between various occupants of the flats, society is not registered.  He further stated that he is willing to extend full co-operation to the purchasers of premises for registration of the society. 

4.       District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum after going through the pleadings of both the parties and the evidence adduced by them has dismissed the complaint directing the complainants to pay an amount of `5,000/- jointly and severally within a period of 30 days.  It is against this order that the org. complainants have filed this appeal.

5.       The matter was on the sine-die list.  It was placed before us on 11/08/2011 and we directed to issue intimation to both the parties.  Accordingly, intimation was issued to both the parties.  Despite of the intimation of next date of hearing, appellant/org. complainant was absent.  On behalf of respondent Advocate Rupesh Sohoni was present. As the matter is old one, we proceed to dispose off the appeal on merits.

6.       Admittedly, the complainants/appellants had taken possession of the flat in December 1994.  The complainants/appellants failed to produce copies of letter dated 16/11/1994, 16/02/1997 & 04/05/1997 alleged to be sent to the opponent/respondent pointing out their deficiencies.  There was settlement between the parties on 16/09/1996 wherein it is stated that, “The building is completed in all respects and duly certified by the concerned authorities such as Civil Engineer, Structural Engineer, Licenced Plumber and Architect and approved by the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai.  There is no question of giving any compensation whatsoever reason at any time.  As such there is no dispute.”  Not only this, the opponent had already obtained Completion Certificate on 27/06/1996 and the opponent had already issued a letter in the name of flat purchaser for forming housing society.  The appellants miserably failed to prove their case before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum.  We observe that the order passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum is just and proper.  We do not find any substance in the appeal.  We hold accordingly and pass the following order :-

                             -: ORDER :-

1.                 Appeal stands dismissed.

2.                 The order of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum is hereby confirmed.

3.                 No order as to costs.

4.                 Copies of the order be furnished to the parties.

Pronounced

Dated 11^th October 2011.