CONSUMER WELFARE ASSOCIATION Vs. K B JOSHI
LAWS(MHCDRC)-2013-4-1
MAHARASHTRA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
Decided on April 26,2013

Consumer Welfare Association Appellant
VERSUS
K B Joshi Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

LATA CONSTRUCTION & ORS. V. DR. RAMESHCHANDRA SHAH & ANR [REFERRED TO]
MARUTI UDYOG LIMITED V. MRS. BHAWNA SABHARWAL & ANR [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

- (1.)THIS appeal takes an exception to an order dated 17/03/2012 in Consumer Complaint No. 290/08, Consumer Welfare Association & ors. v. Shri K.B. Joshi, Chief Promoter/Developer, passed by Mumbai Suburban District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum at Mumbai (hereinafter called as 'District Forum' in short). Aggrieved by the order passed by the District Forum, the original complainants -Consumer Welfare Association and R.N. Malapekar (hereinafter to be called as 'appellants') came before us with the appeal against the original opponents No. 1. Mr. K.B. Joshi, Chief Promoter/Developers, Railwaymen's Apanaghar D -Group Co -op. Housing Society Ltd. and No. 2 -Chairman/Secretary, Railwaymen's Apanaghar D -Group Co -op. Housing Society Ltd.
(2.)THE entire gamut of the case is that the respondent No. 1 -Promoter/Developer proposed to construct the cooperative housing society and provide flats to the railwaymen. In the proposed society, the appellant No. 2 proposed to purchase a flat No. B/G -201 of 475 sq.ft. for which on 07/02/1984, the promoter/developer made an agreement to sale with the appellant No. 2. Appellant No. 2 paid an amount of Rs. 71,250/ - to the promoter/developer.
(3.)THE respondent No. 2 society (original opponent No. 2) was registered in the year 1995. As per the agreement, the promoter/developer was supposed to provide flat No. B/G -201 to the appellant No. 2, but the respondent No. 1 at the time of allotment of the flat replaced the flat No. B/G -201 with B/G -203 and allotted flat No. B/G -203 to the appellant No. 2, though the respondent No. 1 had received an amount of Rs. 1,05,010.50, the entire price of the flat. The changed flat allotted to the appellant No. 2 was not well constructed and did not have required water and electricity connections for which a expenditure of Rs. 2,20,245/ - was required as per the contention of the appellant No. 2. Having no other alternative as the flat No. B/G -201 being allotted to one Smt. Wagle and occupied by her, he accepted the allotment of flat No. B/G -203 in its place instead and took the possession in the year 1995.
In the meanwhile, the respondent No. 2/co -operative society of the railwaymen came into existence and started demanding the regular charges of establishment and taxes from the appellant which came to extent of Rs. 3,38,258/ - and demanded them vide their notice dated 31/01/2008. The respondent No. 2 gave the share certificate of the changed flat No. B/G -203 to the appellant No. 2 on 25/01/2006. As the appellant was being pressed by the respondent No. 2 for establishment charges and also as the changed flat No. B/G -203 was not habitable, the appellant No. 2 gave a complaint to the Mumbai Grahak Panchayat and with their help filed consumer complaint before the District Forum on 22/04/2008 with the prayers as below: - -

"a. That the appellant No. 2 be given possession of either flat No. B/G -201 as per the agreement signed by him with promoter dated 07/02/1984

b. In the alternative, the respondent/opponent No. 1 and 2 be asked to regularize the allotment and possession of flat No. B/G -203 by fresh agreement as per the old agreement and

c. The respondent/opponent No. 1 and 2 be directed to pay costs of Rs. 2,20,545/ - as per the estimate provided by the complainant to make the replacement of flat No. B/G -203 habitable with all amenities as per the original agreement."

;


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