Add Tribune As Your Trusted Source
TrendingVideosIndia
Opinions | CommentEditorialsThe MiddleLetters to the EditorReflections
UPSC | Exam ScheduleExam Mentor
State | Himachal PradeshPunjabJammu & KashmirHaryanaChhattisgarhMadhya PradeshRajasthanUttarakhandUttar Pradesh
City | ChandigarhAmritsarJalandharLudhianaDelhiPatialaBathindaShaharnama
World | ChinaUnited StatesPakistan
Diaspora
Features | The Tribune ScienceTime CapsuleSpectrumIn-DepthTravelFood
Business | My Money
News Columns | Straight DriveCanada CallingLondon LetterKashmir AngleJammu JournalInside the CapitalHimachal CallingHill ViewBenchmark
Don't Miss
Advertisement

Developer penalised for delaying possession

Unlock Exclusive Insights with The Tribune Premium

Take your experience further with Premium access. Thought-provoking Opinions, Expert Analysis, In-depth Insights and other Member Only Benefits
Yearly Premium ₹999 ₹349/Year
Yearly Premium $49 $24.99/Year
Advertisement

Tribune News Service

Advertisement

Chandigarh, December 29

Advertisement

The State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission has directed a developer to pay Rs 50,000 as compensation and Rs 50,000 as litigation expenses to a complainant for delay in giving possession of shop.

In a complaint, Parika Ganeriwal, a resident of Sector 49-A, Chandigarh, submitted that M/s Omaxe Chandigarh Extension Developers Pvt Ltd advertised their new project, ‘CLOCKTON HIGH STREET BUILT-UP SCO’, located in integrated township project “Omaxe New Chandigarh” situated at New Chandigarh, Punjab, with the assurance of payment of ‘assured return’ on the advance amount paid.

In pursuance to an invitation, the complainant purchased the property and was allotted commercial space bearing no. CSCO/SECOND/38 at second floor in the commercial complex in the

Advertisement

aforesaid project of the opposite party.

The agreement was executed with the opposite party on October 13, 2014. The complainant deposited the full and final payment of Rs 27,45,267.58 as the sale consideration to the tune of 100 per cent advance of basic sales price of the unit on the assurance that the opposite party shall pay an ‘assured return’ of Rs 45,587 less applicable TDS per month as compensation/commitment charges against the said advance money till the offer of possession was made.

It was further stated that the addendum to allotment letter dated October 13, 2014, was also issued. The complainant received a demand letter on February 1, 2017, for making the payment as such, he deposited an amount of Rs 4,99,939 on February 15,2017. It was further stated that when the complainant enquired from the opposite party regarding possession, the work was still going on and it was nowhere remotely ready for possession.

The opposite party, in its written reply, stated that the complainant has not disclosed that she has received huge amount of Rs.14,91,170/- from 10.05.2014 to 31.01.2017 towards assured returns in terms of addendum to agreement.

After hearing the arguments, the commission directed the opposite party to pay Rs 45,587 per month as per the addendum letter to the complainant w.e.f. February 1, 2017, till August 2, 2019, along with interest @ 9 per cent per annum.

The opposite party was also directed to pay an amount of Rs 50,000 towards compensation for mental and physical harassment and to pay Rs 50,000 towards litigation expenses to the complainant.

Advertisement
Show comments
Advertisement