M/S. MANGLAM BUILD-DEVELOPERS LTD. Vs. AVIRAL MATHUR & ANR
LAWS(NCD)-2021-1-10
NCDRC
Decided on January 12,2021

M/S. Manglam Build-Developers Ltd. Appellant
VERSUS
Aviral Mathur And Anr Respondents

JUDGEMENT

ANUP K.THAKUR,J. - (1.) This First Appeal No.993 of 2015 has been filed challenging the order dated 06.11.2015 of the Rajasthan State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Jaipur (for short, 'State Commission') in C.C. No.28 of 2014. The impugned order, for ease of reference, is reproduced below: "19. The present complaint of complainants is allowed jointly and severally against the opposite parties as follows: (a) The Opposite Parties shall pay to the complainants consolidated amount of Rs.2 Lacs (Rupees Two Lacs Only) as compensation for the defects and deficiencies in the construction." (b) We restrain the opposite parties from extending the Club House facilities created for the residents of Manglam Arpan, the Villas to any of it's projects viz. Manglam Arpan Residency, the Premium Residential Apartments. (c) We further direct the Opposite parties to:- (i) to construct 6' feet high boundary wall on the fourth remaining side of the campus. (ii) to construct the 30' feet and 40' feet wide CC road at the entrance and in the entire campus. (iii) to provide/fix glasses in the MS railing in the stairs. (iv) The opposite parties shall also pay to the complainants Rs.11,000/- (Rupees Eleven Thousand Only) as cost of proceedings. The compliance of the order shall be made within one month."
(2.) C.C. No.28 of 2014 had been filed, as noted in the impugned order, alleging the following deficiency and defects in the villa: "a) Vitrified tiles have been provided in Drawing and Dining Room and Kitchen instead of Marble flooring; b) Interlocking pavers not provided; c) Kitchen Garden not provided; d) MS Railing with glass not provided; e) Electrical circuits not provided at suitable places; f) Provision for AC not kept in the room; g) Internet connection was not provided; h) DTH installation was not provided; i) Power backup was not provided as promised; j) Bitumen entrance road provided in place of cc road; k) Security arrangements not inadequate; l) Surrounding Wall around campus was not constructed; m) Sewage Treatment Plan was not provided; n) Floating Terrace not provided; o) Club House not functioning; p) Landscape Garden was not provided; 2. Besides these defects the complainants alleged that the opposite party has developed another project-Manglam Arpan Residents-Premium Residential Apartments. The complainant alleged that Club House facility provided for the Manglam Arpan Villa is being shared with the residents of the apartments, while both these projects are different and also no common entrance for these projects is permissible". And making the following prayer for reliefs: "a) Pass an order directing the Respondents not to allow anybody else to enter the club house of Manglam Arpan, the Villas except the residents and their guests. b) Pass an order directing the Respondents to rectify and provide all the services/facilities as promised specifically in the Brochure within a maximum time period of three months. bb) In the alternative, if the Respondents fail to provide such services/facilities, direct the Respondents to pay a compensation of Rs.20,66,000 (Twenty lacs sixty-six thousand) towards the loss of the value and utility in the said property. c) Pass an order directing the Respondents to reimburse Rs.1,27,000/- (One lac twenty seven thousand) for out of pocket expenses incurred by the Complainants. d) Pass an order directing the Respondents to pay damages to the tune of Rs.12,00,000/- (twelve lacs) for the mental harassment and suffering caused to the Complainants. e) Pass an order directing the Respondents to reimburse the costs of the proceedings to the Complainants. f) Pass any other order it deems fit in the interest of justice, equity and good conscience."
(3.) A brief look at the facts reveals that the respondents/complainants (complainants hereinafter) had, on 16.1.2013, booked villa no. 17 in Manglam Arpan on a plot measuring 165 sq. yards. The total consideration was Rs.62 Lakh as settled and agreed between the parties in the Agreement to Sell (agreement hereafter). Initial payment of Rs.11 Lakh (Rs.9.7 Lakh vide cheque no.695528 dated 25.1.2013 and Rs.1.3 Lakh in cash on 26.2.2013) was made against receipts except for cash receipt of Rs.30,000/-. Further, payments of Rs.2 Lakh in cash on 13.3.2013, Rs.45 Lakh vide cheque no.030103 on 31.1.2013, Rs.2 Lakh in cash on 16.7.2013 and then Rs.1 Lakh vide cheque no.198950 on 27.11.2013, aggregating Rs.61 Lakh, was made till the time for filing of the consumer complaint. Per the plaint, 5% of the BSP (Basic Sale Price) was to be paid only after the complainants were fully satisfied with the Villa and other facilities. The complainants have been residing at this Villa since April, 2013.;


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