CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

MAHARASHTRA STATE, MUMBAI



FIRST APPEAL NO.769 OF 2008 Date of filing: 29/05/2008

IN CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO.296/2006 Date of order : 20/06/2009

ADDITIONAL DISTRICT CONSUMER FORUM, THANE

@ MISC.APPLICATION NOS.1096 & 1097/2008



Mr.Haribans Singh

Partner of M/s.Super Construction Co.

Mangalmurti, Opp.Hotel Highway View

Plot no.17, Sector 30, Near Sanpada Railway station

Vashi, Navi Mumbai 400 705 ………..Appellant/org.O.P.no.3

v/s.

1. Mr.Gajanan More

A-3 Poonam park, Flat no.301

Lalbaug, Mumbai 400 012 ………Respondent/org.complainant

2. Panvel Nagar Parishad

Taluka Panvel, District Raigad ………Respondent/org.O.P.no.2



Corum: Shri S.R.Khanzode, Hon’ble Presiding Judicial Member

Smt.S.P.Lale, Hon’ble Member

Present : Mr.S.A.Bhalwal-Advocate for the appellant

Mr.U.B.Wavikar-Advocate for respondent/org.complainant

O R D E R

Per Smt.S.P.Lale, Hon’ble Member

1. This appeal filed by original O.P. in consumer complaint no.296/2006 is directed against the order dated 28/12/2007 passed by Additional District Consumer Forum, Thane, whereby Forum below directed O.P. to pay interest on Rs.4,50,000/- @ 8% from 8/7/2000 till date of order to the complainant.

2. Forum below further directed O.P. to pay Rs.5000/- towards cost of the proceedings to the complainant. Being aggrieved by the said order, original O.P.no.3 has filed the present appeal.

3. There is inordinate delay of 116 days in filing the appeal. No reason is given by the appellant for delay and as such, we find that appellant failed to give any satisfactory cause to condone the delay. Therefore, application for condonation of delay stands rejected. As and by way of abundant precaution, we heard the parties and examined this appeal on merit too.

4. Complainant agreed to purchase a flat no.34, E wing, 2nd floor admeasuring 630 sq.ft. in the building known as SAI LEELA for the total consideration of Rs.4,50,000/-. Accordingly, O.P.no.3 entered into an agreement on 8/7/1999 in favour of the complainant and agreed to hand over possession of the said flat to the complainant on 8/7/2000. According to complainant, O.P.no.3 failed to give possession on 8/7/2000. Therefore complainant was continuously making enquiry with the O.P.no.3 for obtaining possession of the said flat. On 1/10/2002 O.P. informed the complainant that they have obtained Occupation Certificate from the O.P.no.2 and demanded Rs.30,850/- towards miscellaneous charges. Accordingly, complainant paid Rs.30,850/- on 5/10/2002. It is further stated by the complainant that on 7/6/2003, O.P. handed over possession of the flat to the complainant. After taking possession of the said flat, complainant noticed that there was no provision of electricity and no proper approach road to the said building and there was no light on the street. It is also alleged by the complainant that O.P. handed over possession of the incomplete flat to the complainant. Complainant also paid property tax to the O.P. to the tune of Rs.4327/-. It is further alleged by the complainant that due to negligent act of the O.P. complainant and his family suffered physical and mental agony and harassment and therefore consumer complaint was filed by the complainant before the Forum below for deficiency in service for giving delayed possession.

5. O.P. filed its written statement and pleaded that complainant has taken over possession of the said flat on 7/6/2003. Said flat was inspected and verified by the complainant and after fully satisfied, had taken possession of the flat. It further pleaded that occupation certificate was issued and provision of water supply has also been made by the Panvel Municipal Council through tanker. Work of approach road is undertaken by Panvel Municipal Council. After availability and Municipal Council’s permission, the tap water supply will be provided to the complainant. O.P. has already installed electric meter in the said flat. Work of street light is also in progress by O.P.no.2 and finally it prayed for dismissal of complaint.

6. After considering the affidavits and documents, Ld. District Consumer Forum allowed the complaint and passed impugned order.

7. Heard Mr.S.A.Bhalwal-Advocate for the appellant and Mr.U.B.Wavikar-Advocate for respondent/org.complainant.

8. Respondent booked flat bearing no. no.34, E wing, 2nd floor admeasuring 630 sq.ft. and paid total consideration of Rs.4,50,000/- to the appellant on various dates. Appellant entered into an Agreement for sale in favour of the respondent. Date of possession was agreed on 8/7/2000. However appellant handed over possession on 7/6/2003 i.e. after inordinate delay of nearly 3 years. At the time of giving possession, appellant failed to provide basic amenities to the appellant for which respondent and his family suffered mental agony and harassment. No water supply and electricity facility were provided at the time of handing over possession by the appellant. Therefore respondent and his family were not able to stay in the said flat. Appellant provided electricity in January 2007 and provided water supply in November 2007. This amounts to deficiency in service on the part of the appellant. When time is essence of the contract and the appellant has failed to abide by the contractual obligation, appellant is liable to pay compensation to the respondent/org.complainant. Forum below has concluded in its finding and awarded interest on the amount of Rs.4,50,000/- @ 8% from 8/7/2000 till date of order to the respondent/org.complainant. Order passed by the Forum below cannot be interfered when particularly we find the appeal is barred by limitation. In the result, we pass following order:-

ORDER

1. Misc.application for condonation of delay stands rejected.

2. Appeal stands dismissed with no order as to costs.

3. Misc.application for stay stands disposed of.

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







(S.P.Lale) (S.R.Khanzode)

Member Presiding Judicial Member