ARUNDHATI Vs. SWASTIK BUILDERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The learned Counsel Mrs. Chiddarwar for the complainant and Mrs. Padole, Counsel for the respondent present.

(2.) The grievances of the complainant is that she entered into an agreement with the respondent on 30-7-85 for purchase of a flat for a cost of Rs. 2,32,900/- admeasuring 1140 sq. ft. This cost was including the cost of the land. It was agreed that the payment was to be made in stages as per the progress in construction as per Clauses 2 and 3 of the agreement. Defendant also had agreed that the possession was to be given in May, 1988.

(3.) Mrs. Chiddarwar, Counsel for the appellant contended that inspite of the fact that the possession was to be given in May, 1988, the construction itself was not completed. The respondent issued a letter on 22-6-1988 and second letter on 20-7-88 informing the complainant that the possession of the flat will be given upto the end of June, 1989. Even on 30-6-1989, the construction was going on and the flat was not completed. The respondent again wrote a letter on 30-6-1989 informing this complainant that the possession of the flat will be given in March, 1990. From March, 1990 to December, 1990 no possession of the flat was given. On the other hand the letter was addressed to the complainant by the builder on 29-12-1992 wherein the complainant along with others was called for discussion about the escalation in price. This delay in giving possession is on the part of the builder has not been disputed by the respondent. Even for the delayed payment, the Clause 8 prescribed the procedure. The letter was addressed on 7-7-1986 by the respondent builder that the area of construction of the flat has been increased by 120 sq. ft. This letter of the builder was also replied by the complainant wherein it has been specifically stated that the complainant has not asked for the increased space and she is satisfied with the flat of 1140 sq. ft. and, therefore, she is not bound to pay any more cost. Considering the conduct of the respondent builder that the flat was not ready upto 1992 she was constrained to file this complaint claiming refund of the amount as she was not hopeful that the construction will be completed within the stipulated period as assured by the respondent builder. She contended that the original agreement was to deliver the flat in May, 1988. The respondent builder could not complete the work of flat for delivering the possession till December, 1992. This five years waiting period was too much for this complainant as she has made payment to the builder with expectation that she would be living in her own house after the retirement of her husband from Air Force Service. This dream of the complainant could not come true because of the lapses on the part of the respondent. She was required to occupy rental premises for which she is paying the rent and, therefore, she claims that this rental amount also should be recovered from the builder and it be paid to her for the period from May, 1988 till to-day at Rs. 1000/- per month. She also stated that a promise was made by the builder that complainant should occupy the flat belonging to some body else on the 3rd floor. But no clarification about anything was made as this complainant was insisting on transfer of atleast that flat in her name which the respondent declined. Therefore, the complainant claims that she has been deprived of her rights to occupy the flat from May. 1988 till to-day i.e. for a period of seven years and, therefore, she has no hope to get any flat in near future from the respondent as there is no electric supply, water supply and there are no lifts installed even to-day and, therefore, she declared that she can not live on the assurance of the builder when he could not complete the said construction for such a long period of seven years, when she was to be placed in possession of the flat in 1988. Therefore, the complainant claims that an amount of Rs. 1,000/- per month be paid to her towards rent from May, 1988 till to-day, she also claims that her amount of Rs. 2,25,900/- she paid should be refunded to her along with the interest at 18% p.a. She explained that the balance amount of Rs. 7000/- was not paid as it was agreed that the balance amount of Rs. 7,000/- was to be paid on the date of possession. Therefore she claims that this amount of Rs. 2,25,900/- be paid to her along with interest @ 18% p.a. The complainant also claims that she should be paid compensation of Rs. 50,000/- for mental harassment and mental agony due to the non-completion of the flat. She also claims the cost of Rs. 4000/- from the respondent. She further contended that she is not liable to pay any escalation charges as delay was caused due to the lapses on the part of the builder and there is no question of any escalation charges to be paid by the complainant to the builder.