PAREM KUMAR MOHAN LAL PATEL vs DOMINIO F. PATRICIO

THE appellant was the opposite party in Complaint No. 294/93 on the file of Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, North Goa and being aggrieved by direction of Forum to pay interest to the complainant at the rate of 18% per annum on the sum of Rs. 5,75,000/- from 1.6.1993 till the flats are handed over to the complainant, has preferred this appeal.

THAT complaint was lodged by the complainant alleging that he entered into an agreement with the opposite party on 21.1.1993 for purchase of flat Nos. SF3 and SF4 each measuring 70 sq. mtrs. on the 2nd floor of the building known as ''Saidham'' situated at Alto Porvorim, Bardez-Goa for a total consideration of Rs. 6,50,000/-. The opposite party was expected to give delivery of flats before 31.5.1993 and he had paid the total consideration in respect of the same and the opposite party had failed to deliver the possession of flats and therefore, he should be directed to deliver the possession of flats and pay compensation at the rate of Rs 5,000/- per month. The opposite party admitted having entered into agreement with the complainant as mentioned above and the receipt of the amount has not been disputed. Further delivery of flats ought to have been given on or before 31.5.1993 has also not been disputed. On the other hand, it has been stated that non-delivery of flat was on account of non-availability of building materials and it was brought to the notice of complainant and therefore, the complainant was not entitled to any relief whatsoever.

This Commission vide order dated 12.7.1994, directed me appellant to deliver the possession of flats and also to get occupancy certificate. The learned Advocate for the respondent (complainant) admitted that his client has received the possession of flats pursuant to aforesaid order on 31.1.1994.

THEREFORE, the only other aspects that remain to be examined are as to whether the complainant is entitled to interest at 18% per annum on the total sum of Rs. 5,75,000/- from 1.6.1993 to 30.9.1994. When the opposite party has not disputed that the deliver of flats ought to have been given on or before 30.3.1993 and that the receipt of sum of Rs. 5,75,000/- payable, is not disputed, it is for him to make out the non- delivery of flats was due to reasons beyond his control and therefore, he is not in any way liable to pay interest on the said amount. In the course of written version, it has been mentioned that it was on account of non-availability of building material, the flats could not be completed and this was brought to the notice of complainant. It was noticed that as per terms of agreement, extension of time should be obtained if delivery could not be given on or before 31.5.1993. There is nothing on record to indicate that the opposite party sought for such extension or even wrote a letter in that regard. Except stating that building material was not available at that relevant time, no other basis has been made by the opposite party to substantiate his contention in this regard. When it is so, it is clear that the opposite party has not made out any tangible defence for non- delivery of flats on or before 31.5.1993. Hence, there is no scope to take any exception to the direction of District Forum to pay interest at 18% per annum on the sum of Rs. 5,75,000/- till the delivery of possession of flats. THEREFORE, in any view of the matter, we find the appeal is devoid of any merit. In the result, the order of District Forum is confirmed and the appeal is dismissed with no costs. Appeal dismissed. ________________