AKSHAY KUMAR HARINARYAN LAKHANI vs NALINI SHANKARRAO DANI

WE have heard the learned Advocates for both the parties. WE also perused the impugned order dated 30.9.1996 passed by the District Forum, Nagpur in the complaint. The appellant herein is the original complainant and respondent is the O.P. (hereinafter for brevity''s sake complainant is referred to as "Flat purchaser" and respondent as "Builder").

THE matter seems to have chequered history running from the year 1990. THE transaction was as simple as is the case between the Flat purchaser and the Builder duly documented as required under the provisions of the Maharashtra Flat Ownership Act, 1963. Out of agreed consideration of Rs. 3,00,000/- Flat purchaser paid the sum of Rs. 2,90,000/- as per the agreement leaving balance of Rs. 10,000/- at the initial stage. In due course, the complainant also paid the balance amount of Rs. 10,000/- to the Builder. As the possession of the flat was not handed over and certain minor things of installing electric supply and the commissioning of the Lift were not completed, the matter was carried to the District Forum.

The Builder appeared and they raised various contentions. But, by and large, the District Forum as is apparent from its order impugned in this appeal was not impressed upon by the pleas put forth by the Builders and has rendered the findings the Builder being deficient in rendering service because of delay in making over possession.

DISTRICT Forum, therefore, passed the order in the first instance to hand over the possession after completing construction within one month of the receipt of the order. It also provided that if the amount towards the consideration of the flat is payable, then the complainant should also pay the same. In the alternative, the DISTRICT Forum ordered the Builder in the event of non-delivery of possession, that the Builder shall pay interest on the sum of Rs. 2,90,000/- @ 18% p.a. Pertinent and rather strangely nothing was done by the DISTRICT Forum with regard to amount paid by the flat purchaser to the Builder towards the consideration. This has driven the Flat purchaser to approach this Commission in appeal. Across the learned Advocate for the appellant submitted that the flat is ready in all respects and Builder is ready to hand over the possession any time. It is to be stated that the Flat purchaser has also responded to the said offer. So, it will be in compliance of the first operative part of the order impugned in this appeal. The date for possession, etc. will be indicated in the operative part of the judgment herein. Now next grievance of the complainant is compensation and in our view that despite specific finding, holding the Builder deficient in service, the District Forum has completely overlooked and ignored the main point which is grant of compensation to the complainant. In our view, the said grievance of the Flat purchaser is just and appropriate and order in that respect is required to be made. It is noticed that the transaction between the parties took place somewhere in the year 1990. Possession was to be made over in the year 1992. We are now in the year 2002. So nearly 10 years the Flat purchaser had to wait for the possession of the flat. Unfortunately proceedings in the complaint herein has also been dragging on since the year 1993. Taking into consideration all these facts, in our view complainant should be reasonably compensated and we order the Builder to pay a sum of Rs. 25,000/- as compensation to the complainant. ORDER Appeal is partially allowed as under : 1. First part of the operative part of the impugned order, which orders and directs the Builder to hand over possession stands confirmed. 2. Builder/respondent shall pay compensation of Rs. 25,000/- to the flat purchaser/complainant. 3. By consent, the date for making over the possession is fixed on 1.5.2002. It is made clear and distinctly understood that on that date parties shall ensure the making over of possession without any problem. 4. As far as this appeal is concerned, no order as to costs. 5. As far as payment of interest is concerned, which is later part of the impugned order, rate of interest of 18% p.a. to be read as 12% p.a. from 1.1.1996. till date of possession.

Appeal partially allowed.