Case nº Consumer Case No. 942 Of 2015 of NCDRC Cases, July 22, 2016 (case 1. Amarraj Singh Sehmi and Anr. 2. Mrs. Inderjeet Sehmi Vs 1. Shree Shubh Builders Pvt. Ltd. and Ors. 2. Shri Govind T. Samani, Director 3. Ms. Sonata Realty Pvt. Ltd.)

Judge:For Appellant: Mr. Manoj P. Mhatre, Advocate and For Respondents: Mr. Amol V. Deshmukh, Advocate
President:Mr. V.K. Jain, Presiding Member
Defense:Consumer Protection Act - Section 21
Resolution Date:July 22, 2016
Issuing Organization:NCDRC Cases
 
FREE EXCERPT

Order:

  1. The complainants in CC No. 942 of 2015 namely Mr. Amarraj Singh Sehmi and Mrs. Indrajeet Sehmi booked a residential flat with opposite party no. 1 Shree Shubh Builders Private Limited, in a building namely Fountain Square which was to be constructed at Oshiwara, Jogeshwari (West), Mumbai and the sale consideration for the aforesaid flat was agreed at Rs. 7969500/-. Vide letter dated 10.07.2010, flat no. 2706 admeasuring 1265 sq. ft at 27th floor of the building was allotted to them. The possession of the flat was to be delivered by March, 2013. The aforesaid complainants have already paid Rs. 4086275/- to the aforesaid opposite party but the construction of the flat is not complete.

  2. The complainant in CC No. 943 of 2015 namely Mrs. Vidya Damodar Rai and Mr. Damodar Rai also booked a residential flat in the above referred project and vide letter dated 02.02.2010, a flat no. 1807 admeasuring 940 sq. ft. on the 18th floor was allotted to them for a total consideration of Rs. 37,60,000/-. They claim to have paid Rs. 25 lacs to the aforesaid opposite party. In their case also, the possession was to be delivered by March 2013.

  3. In CC No. 944 of 2015, the complainants namely Mr. Ashwin Aloysius D''Souza and Mr. Aloysius D''Souza booked a residential flat and vide letter dated 02.06.2010, flat no. 1801 admeasuring 1255 on the 18th floor of the building was allotted to them for a total consideration of Rs. 50,20,000/-. The possession, according to the complainants, was to be delivered by March 2013. They claim to have already paid a sum of Rs. 32,08,000/- to the aforesaid opposite party.

  4. Since the aforesaid project is stated to be a joint venture between opposite party no. 1 and opposite party no. 2, the complainants are before this Commission seeking possession of the flat from both the opposite parties alongwith compensation etc.

  5. On admission of the complaint, notice was issued to Shree Shubh Builders Private Limited and Sonata Realty Pvt. Ltd.. When the matters came up for hearing on 29.10.2015, there was appearance only on behalf of Shree Shubh Builders Private Limited though notice had been served upon Sonata Realty Pvt. Ltd. as well. Opposite party no. 1 Shree Shubh Builders Private Limited was directed to file its reply within three weeks from 29.10.2015. The said opposite party however, failed to comply with the order dated 29.10.2015. Thereafter, vide order dated 17.12.2015, this Commission, noticing that both the opposite...

To continue reading

REQUEST YOUR TRIAL