Friday, November 15, 2019
facebook
Chandigarh

Posted at: Dec 26, 2017, 2:44 AM; last updated: Dec 26, 2017, 2:44 AM (IST)

Firm penalised for delay in giving possession of flat

Told to refund money, pay compensation to Mani Majra resident

The complaint

  • The complainant, Meenu Yadav, a resident of Rajeev Vihar, Mani Majra, Chandigarh, had booked a flat in ATS Golf Meadows Lifestyle at Dera Bassi in 2012 for which the complainant had paid an amount of Rs 30 lakh as per the agreement with the firm. She said the possession of the flat was to be delivered by June 2016.

Our Correspondent

Dera Bassi, December 25

The State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission has asked ATS Estates Private Ltd, Dera Bassi, to refund Rs 30.92 lakh, along with 12 per cent interest, and pay Rs 1 lakh as compensation to a Mani Majra-based resident for failing to give timely possession of a flat within the stipulated time period.

The complainant, Meenu Yadav, a resident of Rajeev Vihar, Mani Majra, Chandigarh, had booked a flat in ATS Golf Meadows Lifestyle at Dera Bassi in 2012 for which the complainant had paid an amount of Rs 30 lakh as per the agreement with the firm. She said the possession of the flat was to be delivered by June 2016.

The complainant also alleged that the firm not only failed to deliver the possession of the flat, but also indulged in unfair trade practice. In the price break up in the application form, a sum of Rs 2 lakh was claimed as car parking in addition to the basic sale price of Rs 43.70 lakh, Rs 1 lakh and Rs 50,000 for power backup and maintenance security, respectively.

However in the buyers’ agreement, the basic sale price was mentioned as Rs 45.70 lakh, which amounted to unfair trade practice on the part of the firm.

The firm in its reply to the court said the agreement between the parties was contractual in nature and the dispute relating to the contractual obligation could be dealt with arbitrator only. The terms and conditions were duly negotiated and the complainant has accepted the terms and conditions and only thereafter she had signed the agreement and had never raised any objection.

Further, the possession of the unit allotted to the complainant was proposed to be delivered within 36 months with a grace period of six months from the date of actual start of construction. But on account of the implementation of new government policy and laws of real estate industry, it had adversely affected the sale of flats. It was denied that there is any deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of the firm.

The forum after hearing the counsels of both sides and after going through the records had directed the firm to refund Rs 30.92 lakh with 12 per cent interest per annum, Rs 1 lakh as compensation and Rs 21,000 litigation expenses.

COMMENTS

All readers are invited to post comments responsibly. Any messages with foul language or inciting hatred will be deleted. Comments with all capital letters will also be deleted. Readers are encouraged to flag the comments they feel are inappropriate.
The views expressed in the Comments section are of the individuals writing the post. The Tribune does not endorse or support the views in these posts in any manner.
Share On