Delhi

StateCommission

CC/1899/2017

MRS. YOJNA BABLANI & ANR. - Complainant(s)

Versus

TDI INFRASTRUCTURE LTD. - Opp.Party(s)

MONICA SHARMA

22 Dec 2017

ORDER

IN THE DELHI STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL, COMMISSION : DELHI

(Constituted under Section 9 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986)

Date of Arguments :  22.12.2017

Date of Decision :  03.01.2018

 

Complaint No. 1899/2017

 

IN THE MATTER OF:

 

1. Mrs. Yojna Bablani,

W/o Shri Deepak Bablani,

R/o Flat No.1045,

Vikas Kunj Society,

Vikas Puri,​

Delhi-110018

2. Shri Deepak Bablani,

R/o Flat No.1045,

Vikas Kunj Society,

Vikas Puri,

Delhi-110018.                                                         ........Complainants

 

VERSUS

 

          TDI Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd.,

          Intime Promoters (P) Ltd.,

          Registered Office at:

          9, Kasturba Gandhi Marg,

          New Delhi-110001.

 

                Also at:

 

          G-7, Ground Floor,

          Connaught Circus,

          (Opposite Madras Hotel Block)

          New Delhi-110001.                                              ….…Opp. Party

CORAM

 

SH. ANIL SRIVASTAVA, MEMBER

1.     Whether reporters of local newspaper be allowed to see the judgment?                                                               Yes/No

2.      To be referred to the reporter or not?                                                                                                        Yes/No

Present  :   Ms. Prabha, counsel for the Complainant.

 

PER   :   SHRI ANIL SRIVASTAVA, MEMBER

 

          Mrs. Yojna Bablani has filed this complaint before this Commission u/s 17 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against TDI Infrastructure, alleging deficiency in service on the part of OP and praying for the relief as under:-

 

1. Compensation amount aggregating to Rs.29,61,000/- alongwith interest @21% per annum (the rate at which interest was charged by the Respondent on all delayed payment, even when the instalment have been deposited within time) payable pendentlite and future till realisation.
2. Recall claim of increased super area.
3. Take steps for registration of necessary conveyance deed in favour of the Complainant.
4. Cease and desist from charging of use of electricity till registration of the necessary conveyance deed.
5. An amount of Rs.51,000/- towards the aggregate legal expenses and being incurred by the Complainant.
6. Such other order/s as may be deemed fit in the circumstances, may also be passed.

 

          This matter was listed before me for admission hearing on 22.10.2017 when Ld. Counsel for complainant appeared and advanced her arguments for the admission of the complaint. She has drawn our attention towards the page no.147 indicating that the possession of the flat has already been handed over unconditionally.  As per  law settled by Hon’ble NCDRC once possession has been takenover, one is not a consumer and if one is not a consumer, one is also not entitled to raise a consumer dispute under the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act 1986.

 

The judgement delivered by National Commission in the following two matters are on the subject and are as under:-

          Smita Roy Vs. Excel Construction II(2012) CPJ 204 (NC) 

          Harpal Arya Vs. Housing Board Haryana II (2016) CPJ 36 (NC)

 

          Having regard to these circumstances, the complaint is dismissed at the admission stage itself.

 

          Copy of the order be sent to the complainant as statutorily required.

 

          File be consigned to Record Room.

 

 

        (ANIL SRIVASTAVA)                                      

                                                              MEMBER