AJAY MEHTANI vs Ansal Housing and Construction Ltd

THE complainant started depositing the instalments and ultimately a total sum of Rs. 1,61,840/- was deposited by 11.12.1991 for a space in Sampark- 1, City Centre Panchkula. Its area was to be 119 sq. ft. However only area measuring 71.37 sq. ft. is being made available to the complainant. He has instituted this complaint and claimed refund of Rs. 1,61,840/- together with interest @ 24% per annum. Besides this he has also claimed compensation to the tune of Rs. 3.20 lacs on account of mental discomfort and harassment.

INA reply filed on behalf of the respondent the main plea is that Clause 8(a) of the agreement provided that there could be changes such as reduction or increase in the area of the space and there shall be no objection or claim, monetary or otherwise. However the respondent has also averred that since a smaller space has been offered to the complainant, his claim should not exceed more than Rs. 47,648/- plus interest. Clause 8(a) of the agreement is reproduced as under : "If for any reason any changes are required to be made by Sanctioning Authorities or by the Architect or the Lessor reciting in reduction or increase in the area of the above space or its location and the proposed lessee shall have no objection to the same, and no claim, monetary or otherwise will be either raised or entertained except that there shall be proportionate increase/ decrease in premium amount and lease rent mentioned in Clause Nos. 3 and 5 above."

It is not disputed that the respondent-colonisers are not in a position to provide a space of 119 sq. ft. originally offered to the customer. The clause referred to above did not empower the coloniser to reduce the area to such a great extent that instead of 119 sq. ft. the consumer should accept 71.37 sq. ft. only or that it should be considered reasonable. The respondent has not been able to explain as to what was the important reason that such a reduction in the area was necessitated. On behalf of the respondent, it has been urged that this Commission has a limited jurisdiction and is not competent to reopen the terms of a concluded agreement. The depositing of instalments was commenced on or about 11.12.1989 and the total amount stood deposited on 11.12.1991 which is an admitted date. The respondent has failed to provide the agreed space of 119 sq. ft. to the complainant. Even now they are not in a position to provide this space or its almost equivalent, to the complainant. Certainly this amounts to deficiency on the part of the respondent and comes within die purview of this Commission. After considering all the facts and circumstances, it is ordered that the respondent shall refund the total sum of Rs. 1,61,840/- together with interest @ 18% per annum w.e.f. the date of last deposit i.e. 11.12.1991 till realisation. The claim for mental discomfort, harassment, etc. is disallowed. The complainant shall be entitled to costs Rs. 1,000/-.

ANNOUNCED. The order be communicated to the parties free of charges. Complaint allowed with costs.