‘Pay the flat’s current market value’

The Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission has ordered a builder to either hand over possession of a ready flat in Kalyan to a couple who had booked it five years ago, or pay them Rs60 lakh, the flat’s current market value. It also directed the builder, Padma Constructions, to pay Rs3 lakh to Anant Ieetkar and his wife Manjusha as compensation for the ‘mental agony’ and Rs30,000 for the litigation expenses they had incurred. The Commission, which passed the order in September 2013, has given the builder three months to hand over the flat, failing which he will have to pay Rs60 lakh.

In another similar instance, the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission has directed a Mumbai builder to pay around Rs23 lakh compensation, the current market value of an undelivered flat to a middle-aged couple, who had booked a flat in Dahisar in 2006 but never got it. The original cost of the flat was Rs6 lakh. The Commission upheld the order of State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission order dated 13 July 2012. It ordered the builder Falsa Constructions to pay the compensation amount to Vithal and Banjali Dhoke within 60 days or add interest at 21%; the other option was to hand over the agreed flat to them within 12 months.

The couple had booked the flat with Rs1 lakh as down payment in 2005. The builder was planning to build six buildings in the complex. He constructed the other buildings but he did not construct the ‘A’ wing, in which the Dhokes had booked their flat. The builder argued that its obligation under the agreement was hit by the doctrine of impossibility and that fulfilment of the contract was frustrated on account of circumstances beyond the control of the revision petitioner.
 

User

Jolt to Developers in Maharashtra

For those who have bought property between June 2006 and March 2010, the Supreme Court said value added tax (VAT) cannot be imposed on buyers. This has come as a jolt to builders in Maharashtra who wanted 1% tax instead of 5% imposed by the state government in 2006. They were recovering the VAT amount from buyers. Justice RM Lodha upheld the Bombay High Court’s order that VAT cannot be imposed on buyers. The Court also directed the Maharashtra government to bring clarity in Rule 58 (1-A)  relating to VAT rules. In 2006, the state government imposed a VAT of 5% on constructions built between 2006 and 2010. This led to in additional tax liability on properties sold between 20 June 2006 and
31 March 2010.

User

Bank To Pay Rs3 Lakh for Losing Sale Deed

The Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission has ordered IDBI Bank to pay a compensation of Rs3.22 lakh to Captain Vikrant Apandkar in Pune after it lost the original sale deed of his property which he had submitted while procuring a home loan in 2003. Captain Apandkar had sought the document after foreclosing the loan in 2007. The Bank had issued him a no-dues certificate, but told him that the original sale deed was lost. Apandkar said that after submitting the document as evidence for availing the loan in 2003, he repeatedly contacted the Bank to retrieve it. The Bank said that it had conducted an extensive search to trace the document. However, in 2009, the Bank changed its stand and said that the document was never submitted. Aggrieved by the last communication, Apandkar filed the complaint.

User

We are listening!

Solve the equation and enter in the Captcha field.
  Loading...
Close

To continue


Please
Sign Up or Sign In
with

Email
Close

To continue


Please
Sign Up or Sign In
with

Email

BUY NOW

The Scam
24 Year Of The Scam: The Perennial Bestseller, reads like a Thriller!
Moneylife Magazine
Fiercely independent and pro-consumer information on personal finance
Stockletters in 3 Flavours
Outstanding research that beats mutual funds year after year
MAS: Complete Online Financial Advisory
(Includes Moneylife Magazine and Lion Stockletter)