.jpg)
Housing is covered under the term “service”
in the CPA 1986.
The services provided by the builder to the members are comes under the CPA
1986. The members of the Co-operative Housing Societies always face lot of problems with respect to
rendering any services such as allotment
of house, possession
of house, maintenance services in relation to housing complex etc are covered
by the CPA 1986 and a member can approach the Consumer
Forums for claiming compensation and damages against the housing
society/ builder for rendering deficient in services.
Builders and developers play vital role in
redevelopment of housing societies. The real Estate sector has been growing at 25-30 per cent
a year.
Housing society primarily being a co-operative
society, the Society can provide housing loan to the members of the society. One
of the Judgment of Supreme Court i.e. Secretary, Thirumurugan co-operative Agricultural Credit
Society v/s. M. Lalitha, (2004) is applicable for the
Co-operative housing society for deficiency in services
retaining the title deeds.
The Maharashtra
Ownership of Flats Act, 1963, protects buyers against malpractices in the sale and transfer of flats.
It gives homebuyers the right to inspect the builder’s documents such as the specifications
that he has obtained from the authorities. The member has to check if any
changes are being made by the builder to the specifications mentioned in the
agreement and the allotment letter. You must also ask for a copy of the
sanctions that the builder has taken from the authorities to carry out the
alterations.
1.
Builder avoid to form a society.
2.
Delay in possession
3.
Seepage issues
4.
Deficiency in service
5.
The builder forcibly vacates the tenants by
giving them less than 1/3rd of prevailing market rates in the area.
6.
Drinking water provision & motor
pumping to over head tank
7.
Parking problem
8.
Improper earthling & low quality of
electrical wiring of flats are damaging our consumer electrical and electronic
goods.
9.
Four side boundary wall
10.
Occupation Certificate not provided
11.
The builder have provided us poor quality
of lift with no generator backup which very often doe not work and risky for
life.
12.
There are improper amenities in many flats
13.
There is no proper exterior to the
building.
14.
Ceiling Leakage causing bad odor and
particles falling down.
15.
Causing unhygienic condition and a threat
to decease.
16.
No fire safety system completed.
17.
The problem is of Drainage/Gutter Line. The
drainage line is not officially connected with the corporation line.
1.
Due to the reason of constructions by sub
contractor,
2.
Delay by Material Suppliers.
3.
late government approvals,
4.
getting the completion certificate after a
long wait,
5.
cement and steel procurement,
6.
50 to 60 per cent shortfall in unskilled
manpower in the market.
7.
Delay in getting local approvals.
2)
Most of the developers face project delays
and that a lot of the delays are not in the developer’s control. The delays on
account of various reasons do affect the overall budget of a developer,
increases the construction and storage cost and hit the brand image and future
of the company. And this is the reason to direct impact on construction
Companies.
3)
The customers always rely on top class
developers who are sure of their deliveries. The well-known construction
companies who are trying to get more advanced technology for construction to
match their deliveries. However, the cost of adopting such technologies in
India is still very high and many developers are not able to get benefit from
it. Small developers, sometime having funding issues therefore suffers from
delay in possession.
A consumer, as
defined in section 2 (1) (d) of the Act,
can file a complaint in the consumer forum against his grievance. The
properties buyers are considered as consumers and finally have got a voice and
a forum to air their grievances. Using consumer courts, buyers have been able
to get back their money with interest or have been financially compensated
besides allotment of flats by the builders.
The customer
before going to the consumer forum first negotiate with the builder and ask him
to carry out the repair work or to pay compensation for the deficient services
in case you don’t get any action/response from builder then you may go to
consumer court.
In case of delay of possession of flat, the builder is liable to refund the amount paid with interest (for the period of delay) as there has been a breach of contract, the builder would attract penalty under both Consumer Protection Act and the Maharashtra Ownership Flats Act.
In case of delay of possession of flat, the builder is liable to refund the amount paid with interest (for the period of delay) as there has been a breach of contract, the builder would attract penalty under both Consumer Protection Act and the Maharashtra Ownership Flats Act.
In case false
promise by the builder that he will give all the documents i.e original Floor
plan etc. and fails to give customer should definitely go to consumer court and
ask that the builder should stick to the original floor plan which was promised
at the time of sale.
If the builder used defective raw materials for the construction and because of this reason leakage problems started or any other problems facing regarding quality of material you can go to the consumer court by moving it within two years from the day you take possession.
Any aggrieved party can approach civil courts for execution of awards passed by Consumer Courts.
If the builder used defective raw materials for the construction and because of this reason leakage problems started or any other problems facing regarding quality of material you can go to the consumer court by moving it within two years from the day you take possession.
Any aggrieved party can approach civil courts for execution of awards passed by Consumer Courts.
Property buyer
can present their own cases in consumer courts and do not need to engage a
lawyer. The property buyer must file
his complaint within two years of
the dispute arising, after which it becomes outdated. A written complaint, can be filed
before the District Consumer Forum
for property value of up to Rupees twenty lakhs, State Commission for value up to Rupees one crore and the National
Commission for value above Rupees one crore.
If there is delay in
possession of the flat and the default on the part of the
builder would attract penalty under both Consumer Protection Act and the
Maharashtra Ownership Flats Act, 1963.
The buyers must
ensure that his agreement for purchase of flat includes the clause compensation from the builder for delay in
possession.
A landmark judgment recently delivered by a State Commission has ensured redress for a harassed one couple. The State Commission found the builders guilty of ‘Deficiency in Service’. The Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission directed the Builders to pay Rs 7.86 lakh as damages to the said couple and hand over possession of the flat they had bought in 2006.
A landmark judgment recently delivered by a State Commission has ensured redress for a harassed one couple. The State Commission found the builders guilty of ‘Deficiency in Service’. The Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission directed the Builders to pay Rs 7.86 lakh as damages to the said couple and hand over possession of the flat they had bought in 2006.
According to a
top minister in Consumer Affairs Ministry the government has just implemented
the technology solution to enable the electronic filing of consumer complaints
in the country to bring transparency and efficiency in delivering consumer
justice.
The Maharashtra
State
Consumer Commission Mumbai recently directed a developer to shell out Rs. 20
lakh at the rate of Rs. 2,000 a day for a delay in giving possession of a shop
premises to a purchaser.
.jpg)
The order passed by a three-member bench
comprising president S B Mhase, S R Khanzode and D Dhamatkar it was held that
developer was delay to give possession and occupancy certificate to the tenant.
The tenant claimed damages for the delay at Rs. 2,000 per day as stipulated in
the agreement. The tenant also faced grievance that a water connection wasn’t given to him. He
took up the matter with the Thane district consumer forum, which ordered the
builder to pay him Rs. 20,000 as an additional compensation for the “mental agony and financial loss’’.
In one of the recent judgment Mrs. Veena Khanna of New Delhi V/s. M/s.
Ansal Properties and Adharshila Towers, New Delhi: Before National Consumer
Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi:
Due to abnormal delay in handing over the possession of flat, the Complainant had demanded refund of the deposited amount with interest @ 18% which the Opposite party refused to pay. The State Commission, Delhi.
Due to abnormal delay in handing over the possession of flat, the Complainant had demanded refund of the deposited amount with interest @ 18% which the Opposite party refused to pay. The State Commission, Delhi.
directed
the Opposite Party to refund the amount to the complainant with interest @ 13% p.a. from the date of
deposit of the last installment till the date of payment of refund. In the
alternative it also directed that if the Opposite Parties choose to handover
the possession of the flat, the order of refund with interest will not come
into operation. Complainant filed appeal the National
Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission decided that the Complainant
is required to be compensated for delay in construction of the flat and for not
allotting the same to her.
Buyers can take recourse to Section 8 of
the Maharashtra Ownership Flats Act, 1963, which
makes a developer liable to refund the money obtained from a customer with 9
per cent interest if he is unable to justify non-completion of his project. Judgment of consumer court for non registration
of flat by builder. In the matter of M/s Universal Developers & ors v/s Mr. Indra Saini.
This appeal filed against the order passed
by Additional District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Pune the builder
demanded extra amount to register the sale deed. The order passed against the
Developer that, Appeal stands rejected with cost of 5000/-. Cost shall be
deposited in Legal Aid Fund of State Commission within three months
from the date of receipt of
free copy of this order. If
appellant fails to deposit said cost, the Registrar shall see that certificate
u/sec. 25(3) is issued for recovery of said amount.
In The secretary, South Western Railway House Building Co-operative Society v/s K. Velayudhan,
RP No 454 of 2011, decided on 24-2-2011, it was held that a builder cannot
refuse to pay interest on the refund, if such a refund is being sought on
account of deficient service rendered by the builder, or on account of an
unfair trade practice perpetrated by him.
In one of the landmark judgment in the case
of the Lucknow Development Authority v/s
MK Gupta (CA No 6237 of 1990 decided on 5-11-1993), the Supreme Court had
made it clear: “When possession of property is not delivered within the
stipulated period, the delay so caused is denial of service.” A consumer who is
a victim of such delay is entitled to compensation.
A buyer should check the developer’s
credibility, past projects, performance and delivery record. He should also
ensure that the project is funded by a known bank and has all the approvals. A
buyer is entitled to ask for a copy of the project’s drawings, duly stamped by
the municipal authorities.
These
shall be established for the purposes of this Act, the following agencies
namely:- a Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum to be known as the “District
Forum” established by the State Government with the prior
approval of the Central Government in each district of the State by
notification; a Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission to be known as the “State
Commission” established by the State
Government with the prior approval of the Central Government in the
State by notification; and a National
Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission established by the Central Government by notification.
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.png)
.png)