HARISH PARASNATH GUPTA Vs. VRUSHALI VINOD LALINGKAR
LAWS(MHCDRC)-2008-12-3
MAHARASHTRA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
Decided on December 19,2008

Harish Parasnath Gupta Appellant
VERSUS
Vrushali Vinod Lalingkar Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) BEING aggrieved by the judgment and award passed by the District Consumer Forum, Nasik in consumer complaint No. 256/2007 decided on 11.6.2008, whereby the Forum below, while allowing the complaint directed original O.P./builder to give Occupation Certificate and to form Society of the flat purchasers and to execute Conveyance Deed and also to provide amenities as per Agreement between the parties or to pay Rs.1,78,270 and also directed to pay Rs. 10,000 towards mental agony and Rs. 5000 towards cost, original O.P. has filed this appeal challenging the said judgment and award.
(2.) FACTS to the extent material may be stated as under: Original O.P./appellant herein is a builder/developer ,of Nasik. He was constructing a building known as 'Gupta's Plaza'. Complainant/respondenthereinbooked flat No. 2 in the said proposed building and Agreement of Sale was executed between the parties on 7.10.2003. According to complainant's allegation in the complaint, O.P. had agreed to give possession of the flat within 6 months. O.P. was to give Completion Certificate and execute Conveyance Deed. O.P. was to give amenities as mentioned in the Agreement. Those amenities were not provided by the O.P. and according to complainant, for not providing amenities, she would have to spent amount of Rs. 1,78,270 as per certificate of Architect and therefore, she filed consumer complaint against the O.P. with a prayer that amenities should be directed to be provided by the O.P. and Conveyance deed should be executed, Society should be formed, completion should be obtained and in case amenities are not provided, she should be given amount of Rs. 1,78,270 and she also claimed compensation for mental agony of Rs. 3,20,000 against the O.P. by filing consumer complaint.
(3.) O .P. filed written statement and admitted that complainant had booked a flat in Gupta's Plaza and that Agreement of Sale in favour of complainant was executed on 7.10.2003. However O.P. pleaded that complainant herself did not comply with the terms and conditions of the Agreement. She did not pay whole of the consideration amount within 6 months and therefore flat could not be given in her possession within said period. He further pleaded that complainant had filed Civil Suit against him claiming virtually same prayers. Therefore complainant is not entitled to file consumer complaint for the similar reliefs and as such, Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain such a complaint. O.P. also pleaded that complaint has been filed beyond the period of limitation and the complaint is also hit by misjoinder of necessary parties and therefore O.P. pleaded that complaint should be dismissed with cost.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.