Visaka Industries: Sheltered

Visaka has recorded steady growth and consistent dividend payouts

Visaka Industries is...

Premium Content
Monthly Digital Access


Already A Subscriber?
Yearly Digital+Print Access


Moneylife Magazine Subscriber or MSSN member?

Yearly Subscriber Login

Enter the mail id that you want to use & click on Go. We will send you a link to your email for verficiation
M&M tractor sales jump 24% in May

“The prospect of a good monsoon would also add buoyancy to the farmers’ morale and lead to a stronger growth for the overall agricultural sector,” M&M Chief Executive, Tractor and Farm Mechanisation, Rajesh Jejurikar said

Mahindra & Mahindra’s (M&M) tractor sales rose 24.24% to 23,626 units in May 2013 compared with 19,016 units in the corresponding period of last year. Domestic sales of tractors grew 24.7 per cent to 22,471 units from 18,019 units.


Commenting on the monthly performance, Mahindra & Mahindra Chief Executive, Tractor and Farm Mechanisation, Rajesh Jejurikar, said the company is happy to have achieved a consistent growth over the last two months which will have a positive impact on the overall tractor industry.


“The prospect of a good monsoon would also add buoyancy to the farmers’ morale and lead to a stronger growth for the overall agricultural sector,” he added.


The company said its tractor exports rose 15.84% to 1,155 units last month against 997 units in the same period last year.


NCDRC directs Unitech to reimburse rent to buyer for delay in giving flat

The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission ordered the real estate major to reimburse nearly Rs14 lakh spent by a customer on rent after the flat for which he paid over Rs1.37 crore in 2007 was not handed over to him till date

Realty major Unitech has been directed by the apex consumer commission to reimburse nearly Rs14 lakh spent by a customer on rent after the flat for which he paid over Rs1.37 crore in 2007 was not handed over to him till date.


The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) also pulled up the real estate major and its top officials, executive chairman Ramesh Chandra and managing directors Sanjay Chandra and Ajay Chandra, saying “even after lapse of six years the flats are not ready”.


“It is clear that the opposite parties (Unitech and its officials) want to have benefit of both the worlds. They have received the entire price of the apartment at the time of execution of the agreement. Even after the lapse of six years, the flats are not ready.


“The opposite parties have offered peanuts for delaying construction of work. They have to honour their commitment,” a bench headed by Justice JM Malik said, giving six months time to Unitech to hand over the flat in one of its residential townships in Gurgaon to Sanjay Goyal.


The bench said that after the period of six months is over, Unitech will have to pay Rs25,000 for every additional month of delay in handing over possession and awarded Gurgaon resident Goyal Rs50,000 as compensation.


The NCDRC also directed Unitech to reimburse the rent of Rs42,500 per month from October 2010 to August 2012 (Rs9.35 lakh) and Rs50,000 from September 2012 to May 2013 (Rs4.5 lakh) paid by Goyal.


The commission also directed the real estate company to pay the current rent of Rs50,000 per month being paid by Goyal for the time it takes to hand over possession of the flat.

In his complaint, Goyal alleged that he had in September 2007 paid Rs1,37,89,069 to Unitech for a flat in one of its housing projects ‘Harmony’ at “Nirvana Country” residential township in Sector 50, Gurgaon, Haryana and as per the buyers agreement he was to get possession of the unit by September 2010.


Till date the possession had not been handed over to him, Goyal had said.


Unitech had offered to pay Goyal Rs7.5 per square feet as holding charges for the delay in handing over possession or to refund entire amount paid by him with interest of 15%, but he had refused to settle, the NCDRC noted.



chetan aggarwal

10 months ago

Another similar Judgement against fraud builder from Apex consumer court
National Consumer commission judgment Case numbers CC/142/2012, CC/158/2014 and CC/356/2014

Background of cases
17 buyers filled three cases in NCDRC for fraudulent practices adopted by M/S MVL Limited in their project MVL Coral, Bhiwadi, Rajasthan . M/s MVL Limited floated a scheme in the year 2006 and aggressively marketed the said project promising high living luxury apartments, specially designed Swimming Pool, 24 hour power back up, Modular Kitchen, Covered Car Parking, Garden, Play Area, Security Club house, Rain Water Harvesting, Wifi Internet, Gymnasium etc. The project was planned with five towers namely Avenue-1,2,3,4 and 5. Out of 5 towers, only tower no. 5 has been constructed at site as per approved layout plan. The numbering and layout plans of all other towers were changed for unprecedented gains by the builder. 3 complainants had booked in tower-5 and all others in other towers. MVL Limited could not obtain mandatory occupancy certificate for the said project.
Court Orders
In its order, the NCDRC on 7-12-2015 said 3 buyers of tower-5 will take possession. MVL Limited is directed to furnish the occupation certificate, within 9 months from date of orders, as agreed, otherwise, it will carry additional penalty in the sum of Rs.2,000/ per day for each of the complainants, after the expiry of said 9 months. There was a delay in providing possession in the premises in dispute. Consequently, they be paid penalty of delayed possession @ 15% per year,
till the possession is given. MVL Limited is also directed to provide covered car parking, club membership, power backup, park facing flat, wherever applicable and corner flat, wherever is applicable, as mentioned in the agreement, within a period of 9 months, as already ordered, otherwise, it will return the entire amounts paid by the complainants, along with interest @15% p.a. from the date of receipt of the money, till realization.
For all other complainants commission noted MVL Ltd. had changed its original plans and increased the number of floors, flooring area, ratio and density per acre. It has caused inordinate delay in completion of said projects. It has changed zoning plans, usage pattern, super area, carpet area and alteration of structures. This is an indisputable fact that the MVL Limited, of its own accord, arbitrarily and despotically, without seeking the consent of the allottees, has changed the tower number. This is deficiency on its part. The consumers cannot be compelled to accept the flats according to the sweet choice of the builder. The choice of builder cannot be imposed upon the consumers. It would be worst kind of highhandedness on the part of the builder.

Consequently, all other complainants are entitled of refund of money. All the remaining complainants shall be refunded the money that they had paid with interest @15% p.a from the date they paid till realization.
All the complainants are entitled to costs in the sum of Rs.25,000/each complainant.


3 years ago

What? Is this for real? The turtle-armed law of our land (with a tiny ‘l’) has finally, I mean FINALLY caught up with the octopus-armed Unitech, THE U-N-I-T-E-C-H with a capital ‘U’? And The BIG Bs in question were actually given a dressing-down by the NCDRC bench, and news agencies actually named each one of them for a change? Wow! This has got to be a Guinness Book record of sorts!
Now, are we going to see some Top Gun intervene on the 3 Bs’ behalf by making the petitioner in question account for every penny he earned that he was forced to spend on rent? Or by insisting there was ‘ZERO LOSS’ to him since the day he signed that raw deal with Unitech? Or by warning that the 3 Unitechers are ‘TOP businessmen’ and if they’re made to pay there will be NO ‘FOREIGN investment’? Or by setting up a task force to recommend cancellation of the Trio’s punishment for public order/national security reasons? Or by endorsing Unitech’s forged documents and demands for ransom under the threat of blood-spilling/ hanging or another 10-year wait for justice etc etc etc? The kind of means and people at the Big Bullies’ disposal have given their monstrous octopus group with many names complete immunity for decades to act with impunity and get away with murder (er, metaphorically speaking).
If none of the above-mentioned interferences with the due process of justice takes place and Unitech directors and staff do as they were told well, then, the decision of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission bench would indeed call for a BIG thump on the back for those who must have had to tighten many screws and embolden themselves to enable the petitioner in question (the lucky one amongst many, many such Unitech victims still waiting for more than a decade) to get some semblance of justice (although 50,000 as compensation is a pittance). One will have to wait and see the outcome of this record-breaking NCDRC bench ruling before celebrating.
And somebody once asked on an e-forum, ‘Why are people so happy that (name of a Unitech director) is in jail?’ (another record-breaking decision prior to his being let off on bail). This input, and other such inputs from Unitech complainants (i.e. those that haven’t been deleted on orders ‘from above’), should answer that.

We are listening!

Solve the equation and enter in the Captcha field.

To continue

Sign Up or Sign In


To continue

Sign Up or Sign In



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)