JYOTI KUMAR TIWARI Vs. ANUMAN DEVELOPERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present Complaint is filed under Sec. 21(a)(1) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

(2.) Case of the Complainant is that on 29/11/2001 the Complainant and Opposite Party Nos. 1 and 2 entered into agreement for sale of Flat No.VSH/B-102, 1st Floor in the building Vaastu Shubh, Shree Vastu Enclave, behind Manish Park, Rajmata Jijabai Road Pump House, Andheri (East), Mumbai-400093. The price of the flat was Rs.18,83,400.00, inclusive of the State duty payable. Possession of the flat was to be handed over by March, 2002. The Complainant paid Rs.1,75,000.00 in cash towards stamp duty and other expenses on 13/11/2001, but no receipt was issued for this amount. The Complainant made further payment of Rs.4,33,400.00. Rs.3,33,400.00, vide Cheque No.00173963 drawn on SBI, Andheri and Rs.1,00,000.00, vide Cheque No.383860 drawn on ICICI Bank, Andheri, both dtd. 21/11/2001. The Complainant was made to sign another for sale and the Complainant was assured that all matters relating to stamp duty/payment/franking etc. shall be taken care of and he shall be informed of registration of the flat. On 4/12/2001, the Complainant was asked to reach the office of Sub Registrar for registration of the flat. The registration, however, could not be done on that date. On 6/12/2001, Opposite Parties Nos.1 and 2 informed that Complainant that the original documents were submitted to the Sub-Registrar's Office where they got missed and an FIR to that effect was lodged on 5/12/2001 at Mata Ramabai Ambedkar Police Station, Mumbai-400001 and a letter dtd. 6/12/2001 was also given to the Superintendent of Stamps narrating the incident.

(3.) The Complainant sent letters 12/12/2001, 17/12/2001 and 27/12/2001 to Opposite Parties Nos.1 and 2 pointing out the defects in the flooring and requested them to remove the defects. The Complainant, vide letter dtd. 17/12/2001, requested Opposite Parties Nos.1 and 2 for early completion of paperwork and registration of agreement. On 11/1/2002, the Complainant, met Opposite Party No.2 and again requested to adhere to their commitment regarding marble finish of the flooring, whereupon Opposite Party No.2 adopted a threatening attitude. On 15/1/2002, the Complainant sent a summary of the events stating deficiency in service and unfair trade practices to Opposite Parties No.1 and 2 and requested them to register the agreement for sale. Opposite Party No. 1 and 2, vide their reply dtd. 24/1/2002 denied the allegations of the Complainant and asked him to deposit balance amount of Rs.14.00 lakhs within 15 days, failing which the agreement would stand cancelled. The Complainant contacted Opposite Party No. 2 requesting to proceed with the registration of the property so that he could obtain house loan from the Bank. The Opposite Parties pressurised the Complainant to withdraw his letters dtd. 12/12/2001, 17/12/2001, 27/12/2001, 15/1/2002, and 30/1/2002 and accept the flat with tile finish before registration. The Complainant was also made to sign a letter drafted by the Opposite Parties Nos.1 and 2, wherein it was written by them that the flat in question was ready. The Complainant signed the letter after striking off the incorrect words therefrom. Thereafter, another draft was prepared by Opposite Parties Nos.1 and 2 without the struck off portion of the earlier draft and the Complainant was made to sign this letter as well.