Tribunals and Commissions

DEVI vs SENIOR CITIZEN HOME COMPLEX WELFARE SOCIETY

National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission · Decided on 10 August 2004 · Citation: 2005 1 CPJ 115

HON’BLE JUDGES
Palok Basu , R.N.Prasad , Vinod Shankar Chaubey J.
RESULT
Appeal disposed of
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

6 paragraphs · 725 words
1.

THIS is an appeal under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter called the ''Act'') against the judgment and order dated 10.6.2002 passed by District Consumer Forum, Gautam Budha Nagar in Complaint Case No. 531/2002.

2.

INITIALLY a complaint was filed with the allegations that she had applied for a flat in an Ultra Modern Residential complex being built by the opposite party. She deposited total cost of the flat amounting to Rs. 7,50,000/- in instalments but till date the opposite parties have not delivered the possession nor have given the promised amenities in the said complex. The complainant being a senior citizen has been deprived of her hard earned money despite the fact that the respondent had stated quite clearly in the agreement dated 21.11.1996 that the complex shall be constructed and delivered within 30 months of the date of registration (i.e., 21.8.1996 + 30 months). The respondent filed their reply denying the allegations made in the complaint.

The parties led their respective evidence and thereafter the learned District Forum passed the impugned judgment and order.

3.

BEING aggrieved the appellant has preferred an appeal. We have heard the learned Counsel for the parties and have perused the material available on the record.

4.

IT was contended by the learned Counsel for the appellant/that although the learned District Forum recorded a categorical finding that there has been deficiency of service yet awarded an inadequate amount of compensation on the count of harassment and mental agony. IT was argued that the rate of interest should have been much more than 15% and it should have been 24% as initially demanded in the complaint. IT was also argued that the learned District Forum has erred in applying the cut of date as 30.10.2001 whereas the agreement clearly states that the building shall be delivered by 30 months from the date of registration which is 20.2.1999. Consequently, it was argued that the interest should have been awarded from 20.2.1999. During the course of hearing the appellant further drew to our notice that although a sum of Rs. 7,50,000/- was deposited yet the possession was not delivered of the flat equipped with all modern facilities. Some preliminary objections too were taken by the opposite party. In the instant case certain facts are clear. A sum of Rs. 7,50,000/- towards the allotment of flat has been accepted. Even the possession so far has not been delivered. The grievance of the complainant is that the flat in question has not been furnished with the facilities so necessary for accommodation and even the lift is not functioning properly. The right to have the allotted flat being equipped with all the necessary facilities is undisputed. It has been given to understand that the opposite party is now ready to hand over the possession of the flat in question duly equipped with all the necessary facilities. Even it has been stated that lift will be available in working condition for the use of the appellant and other allottees. Thus, on merits no further remains to be decided as the appellant has expressed his eagerness to accept the flat. Let now the possession be delivered without any further delay.

5.

AS regards the quantum of interest and rate of interest is concerned much has been said on both sides. On one hand there are allegations that the complainant caused numerous obstacles in completion of the flat as the instalments were not paid on due dates. The case or the other hand is that the flat in question was not duly equipped with all necessary facilities. This being the case, we are of the view that the appellant is not entitled for the interest either on @ 15% as ordered or on 24% as claimed. We are of the views that in one lumpsum, interest of Rs. 35,000/- will meet the ends of justice. The appeal is decided accordingly. The possession shall be delivered within a period of one month. ORDER The opposite party shall deliver possession of flat within a period of one month and the complainant/appellant shall also be entitled for interest of Rs. 35,000/- in lumpsum which shall also be paid within one month from today. The appeal is disposal of accordingly. Let copy of this order be made available to the parties as per rules. Appeal disposed of.