The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Chandigarh, has directed UK Homes Private Limited to pay Rs50,000 as compensation for unfair trade practices and deficient services to Manimajra-based residents.
Following a complaint filed by Satish Gour and Dinesh Gautam, residents of Modern Housing Complex, the Forum directed the real estate developer to refund Rs6 lakh paid as booking amount along with 12% interest.
The Forum, presided by Rajan Dewan, held that “The failure on the part of the developer to hand over the possession of the plot in question within the stipulated period or refunding the amount thereof to the complainants, despite requests, certainly amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice.” UK Homes Private Limited would also have to pay Rs7,000 as litigation cost to the complainants. As nobody appeared on behalf of UK Homes Private Limited, the case was taken up ex parte.
The Thane District Consumer Redressal Forum fined Tania Constructions Rs5 lakh for deficiency in service to Tania Kadamb Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. The Society had filed a complaint with the Forum that Tania Constructions, and its managing director Peter Fernandes, had failed to provide amenities as per the sale agreement with the Society.
Forum president Umesh Jhavalikar and member ND Kadam dismissed the builder’s submission and observed that he had failed in his legally bound duty of providing the land rights, the completion certificate and the transfer of rights to the Society. The builder was deficient in his services and violated the provisions of the Maharashtra Ownership Flats (Regulation of the Promotion of Construction, Sale, Management and Transfer) Act, 1963.
Competition Commission of India imposed a penalty of Rs10,62,062/- on Chemist and Druggists Association, Goa for indulging in anti-competitive practices
The Competition Commission of India (‘the Commission’) has found the Chemist and Druggists Association, Goa (CDAG) to be in continued contravention of the provisions of the Competition Act, 2002 (‘the Act’). Observing that the case involved continued contravention and utmost disrespect to the Commission’s earlier order, the Commission imposed a penalty calculated at the rate of 10% of the average receipts of CDAG amounting to Rs10,62,062/- (Rupees ten lakhs sixty two thousand and sixty two rupees only). The penalty is to be deposited within 60 days of receipt of the order.
In an earlier case [MRTP-C-127/2009/DGIR (4/28)], the Commission found CDAG to be in contravention of the Act and thereafter passed an order under section 27 of the Act on 11 June 2012 imposing a penalty of Rs2 lakh on CDAG. In a subsequent complaint filed by M/s Xcel Healthcare, it was brought to the notice of the Commission that CDAG was restraining pharmaceutical companies such as M/s Glenmark Pharmaceuticals Limited and M/s Wockhardt Limited from doing business with non-authorised stockists and thereby not complying with the order of the Commission. The Commission took suo-moto cognizance and ordered the Director General to investigate the matter.
Following detailed investigation, the Commission found that CDAG was indulging in anti-competitive practices in complete disregard to the Commission order dated 11 June 2012. It was found that CDAG was continuing to exercise control on the supply chain through which drugs and medicines are made available in the market through the practice of requirement of LOC/NOC prior to appointment of stockists by pharmaceutical companies without having any legal or statutory authority in this respect.
Further the Commission also found that CDAG forced pharmaceutical companies to follow its mandate by threatening the other stockists in Goa to stop taking supplies or suspend receiving supplies from them till such time they stopped supplies to the unauthorised stockists such as M/s Xcel Healthcare.